tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-14609271846735316012024-02-20T16:22:08.514-08:00ArminiblogThe life and theology of James ArminiusArminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.comBlogger43125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-62119103854149835942009-01-15T00:00:00.000-08:002010-07-20T21:24:47.881-07:00Appendix<span style="font-style: italic;"></span><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />APPENDIX.<br /><br />Brandt has appended to his memoir the two Latin poems by Baud and Grotius, on the death of Arminius, to which he refers, p. 300. Baud's poem is very long, occupying twenty pages of the original, and containing some 600 lines. It is, moreover, in its tone, somewhat equivocal and temporising; and elicited, in consequence, a complaint from the true and magnanimous Uitenbogaert, to which Baud replies in a strain of profoundest respect, both for him and the deceased Arminius, — declaring that of all his old friends they were the two that stood highest in his esteem, and that he had advanced nothing in his poem which could sustain a single sinister inference in regard to Arminius. The truth is, Dominic Baud, like Daniel Heinsius, though conscious of the sincerest friendship and respect for Arminius gave way, after his death, to that violent pressure of the times to which Arminius himself had '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">fallen a blessed martyr.</span>' Baud's poem contains many bold and masterly passages, that abound in vigorous thought and lofty imagery. We had translated the larger half of it into English verse, with a view to its insertion in this appendix; but, on second thoughts, we have concluded to let that pass as labour lost. Its great length, to mention no other consideration, would make it out of all proportion.<br /><br />The poem of Grotius, on the other hand, is of sufficiently moderate limits to make its insertion here consistent with the scope and symmetry of the volume; while the transcendent lustre of his name, and his well-known attachment to the Arminian cause, lend a peculiar interest and charm to his verses on Arminius. For the sake of those, accordingly, for whom this little work is specially intended, we have in this instance, also, — though profoundly sensible of the difficulty and delicacy of the task, — done our best to present the lines of Grotius in faithful English, in the following metrical version.—TR.:—<br /><br />ELEGIAC POEM OF HUGH GROTIUS, ON THE DEATH OF ARMINIUS.<br /><br />Deep searcher in the mine of truth profound;<br />Spirit sublime, with various learning stored;<br />For keen-edged perspicacious wit renowned;<br />Arminius, thee we mourn:— O loss deplored!<br /><br />From this dark world, and from the turbid throng<br />Of dim-eyed mortals, thou hast winged thy flight:<br />And rangest now, with vision pure and strong,<br />The sunny fields of beatific light.<br /><br />Whether for truth thou gaind'st some trophies fair,<br />Spurning the yoke on tamer necks that pressed;<br />Or erred in aught, as man may err, declare<br />Ye who have right to judge, and skill to test.<br /><br />Yet well we know what hours by thee were spent<br />O'er God's own book, enslaved to no man's creed.<br />And now, of conscience pure, and high intent,<br />Thou bear'st, by heaven's award, the glorious meed.<br /><br />There, filled with peace and joy, 'tis thine to know<br />What here thy thoughts explored with toil and pain;<br />Thou seest what shades enwrap all minds below;<br />What wears the name of knowledge here, how vain.<br /><br />Yet, proud thereof, aloft we raise our head,<br />And spurn our fellows, who return the same.<br />Hence wars polemic, furious, rise and spread;<br />Hence hate plebeian stirs and feeds the flame.<br /><br />And sacred Truth, of sacred Peace the friend,<br />Deigns not her presence there, but flies afar:<br />Ah, why does lust of strife men's bosom rend?<br />And will the God of peace be pleased with war?<br /><br />Whence such untempered zeal, such parties new?<br />Hath Satan sowed these tares 'neath mask of night?<br />Must men's dire passions feed on aught they view,<br />And God's own cause afford them scope to fight?<br /><br />Or does this prying world, that dares to tread<br />Where even to angels all access is barred,<br />And snatch forbidden knowledge, serpent-led,<br />Reap in these sad debates its due reward?<br /><br />As when at Shinar, in that structure proud,<br />Men thought to pile a stepway to the sky;<br />Their thousand tongues dispersed the impious crowd,<br />And all their schemes in babbling strife did die.<br /><br />Ah ! know we what we do? The little flock<br />Elected from the world, in Jesus' fold,<br />Each other rend, in foul and frequent shock,<br />While Moslems smile, and Jews with joy behold!<br /><br />Happy the simple, pure, and artless faith,<br />From faction free, and meretricious dress;<br />Which sees sin put away by Jesus' death,<br />And trusts in his atoning righteousness:<br /><br />Which sees salvation free, — all gifts above;<br />And doom ordained for those who doom deserve:<br />Which plies the gentle part of holy love,<br />Nor seeks to soar, so much as lowly serve.<br /><br />Nor asks too far if adamantine laws<br />Fix all events; — How God, all sinless still,<br />Wills sin? — How not? — How far the Great First Cause<br />Bends by his sovereign nod the human will?<br /><br />And happy he whom no ambitious ends,<br />Nor gain, nor empty plaudits turn aside;<br />But, fired with heavenly zeal, still heavenward tends,<br />And studies God where God himself doth guide.<br /><br />Threading with cautious steps life's 'wildered maze,<br />Through fatal snares his course he daily winds;<br />While Freedom, tempered with Love's gentle rays,<br />Secures his concord with dissentient minds.<br /><br />True piety and justice he maintains, —<br />Condemned by men, himself condemning none;<br />Now speaks for Truth, and now for Peace refrains,<br />Still watchful each presumptuous path to shun.<br /><br />Oft didst thou urge these truths, Arminius dear —<br />In public oft, as thousands can declare;<br />In private, too, — yea, when thine end drew near,<br />Thy parting breath still urged these counsels fair.<br /><br />With life's protracted ills out-worn and spent,<br />Tired of a world of pertinacious strife,<br />Though crushed thy meaner part like shattered tent,<br />Thy nobler part, unscathed, aspired to life.<br /><br />Full spread, it longed to gain those kingdoms bright<br />To which to thousands thou did'st point the way;<br />And now arrived, another star of light,<br />It gems the temple of eternal day.<br /><br />There dost thou pray, that to his flock below<br />God would such light, as here they need impart;<br />And curb their restless wish aught more to know;<br />And send them teachers after his own heart:—<br /><br />Would all men's hearts (if not all tongues) unite;<br />And Strife dispel, before Love's ardours driven;<br />That Christ's whole Church, at one, may, in his light,<br />Approve their life to earth, their faith to heaven.<br /><br />EPITAPH.<br />Subtle in intellect, and great in speech,<br />But careful most his life to regulate,<br />Arminius, dead, thus speaks, thus all would teach,<br />(Of life approved, and matchless in debate):—<br />'I, as in life, in death this counsel give —<br />BE LESS DISPOSED TO ARGUE THAN TO LIVE.'Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-82061317672766870642009-01-14T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:39:38.479-08:00Chapter 13 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 13, Part 3 of 3 (p. 310-319).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />On the other hand, as Arminius himself had abundantly refuted these accusations, and many others of the same kind, so at this time also Bertius, Uitenbogaert, Simon Episcopius, Corvinus, Narsius, Courcelles, Poelenburg, and others, undertook the vindication of his blessed memory; and for this reason they began to receive from their adversaries the designation of Arminians.<br /><br />First of all, let us listen to Arnold Poelenburg, that most worthy champion of the Remonstrants, as he pleads the cause of Arminius against the charges of Hoornbeck. Referring to the passage just cited, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Behold,' he exclaims, 'with how great a rage of calumniation he (Hoornbeck) burns! For what could he mean by traducing Arminius, of pious memory, after his death, as one "who trusted to his own speculations," when he, too, acknowledged the Sacred Scriptures to be the only rule of his faith, and had greatly the better of his opponents, at once in the number and in the weight of his testimonies? What could be his object in declaring that Arminius "showed himself much too eager to demolish all else," when nothing lay nearer his heart than to get the Church restored to her pristine purity and peace? But on reading those statements in which he brands Arminius, the best of men, as "a covenant-breaker," I was utterly horror-struck, and much at a loss to divine whence a degree of audacity so great and so extraordinary had come to be generated in a man speaking things that were false, and maintaining an unjust cause. For why, is <span style="font-style: italic;">that man</span> to be called a covenant-breaker who defends with all his might the covenant which God has struck with the entire human race? After this, there is no reason why he should not brand almost all the Ancient Fathers as covenant-breakers; for they either knew not, or they opposed, absolute predestination. But I think I can discern to what he refers — namely, to this, that Arminius did not subscribe to the Belgic Confession and Catechism. But it had already been answered, that very many traces of our opinion are to be found in these writings. Besides, Arminius had never so enslaved his faith to any human composition as to imply that such was not, at all times, to be weighed in the balance of Scripture. What? Is Hoornbeck prepared to call Luther, Musculus, and many more, "covenant-breakers," because, when bound by vows to the Papacy, they felt unable with a sound conscience to remain in the Papacy? For as formerly, and still, the Papists, so the Reformed of the day, unhappily defend certain grievous errors of their own, under cover of the Holy Scriptures erroneously understood: although, we own, not altogether after the same fashion. Let that liberty, then, be conceded to Arminius, which has been conceded to numerous others before him. For my part, I maintain, that to a man of high standing, and endowed with distinguished gifts, it is not only allowable, but, by virtue of his office, it is also incumbent upon him, to oppose with all his might prevailing errors which had come to be regarded as necessary truth.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">A. Poelenb. Epist. ut supra pag. 6, 7.</span>].<br /><br />But not to insist on the testimonies of Remonstrants, in what esteem the name of Arminius, — to many so hateful, — continued to be held by the honourable curators of the Academy, will be apparent from the fact that to his widow, Elizabeth Real, and to her fatherless children, whom they took under their protection, they assigned a handsome annuity; and that very dignified body, the Senatus Academicus, in compliance with their request, at once furnished them with the following testimony to the deceased:—<br /><br />The Rector Magnific, and Senatus of the Academy of Leyden-in-Holland, to all and sundries, who may read or hear this testimony, greeting:<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Inasmuch as it has seemed good to Almighty God to call that distinguished and reverend man, James Arminius, Doctor of Sacred Theology, and Professor in Ordinary of that Faculty in this our Academy, away from that professorship which, for a series of years in which he thus acted, he exercised with singular assiduity, and with the applause of his hearers, into the celestial country, and to grant him an everlasting release and immunity from those protracted labours which he sustained both in the Church and in the Academy; and seeing that the surviving widow of this same deceased man, of most blessed memory, together with the children which she had by him, has requested, as a debt due to his eminent virtues, that the Senatus would furnish her with a testimonial, — a request which, considering the many distinguished endowments of that man, appears to us to be nought else than just; we willingly contribute the last office which it is in our power to discharge to his very dearly cherished memory. We testify, therefore, that the said James Arminius, D.D., led such a life in this our Academy as to teach Sacred Theology (for we leave controversies to others) both in public and in private, with the utmost assiduity and diligence [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">It is to be observed that this same formula also occurs in the testimony which the Senatus Academicus gave to Gomarus, when he left for Middelburgh.</span>]. And besides, in the Senatus Academicus, as became an eminently wise and prudent man, he maintained by his judgment, counsel, and authority, that place and dignity which was due at once to himself and to the whole honourable order; and to public matters which fell to be transacted by us in our assembled capacity he was ever ready to postpone those which were personal and private. Whatever he thought conducive to the interests of the Academy, he frankly propounded; whatever he deemed the contrary, to that with the like freedom he declared himself opposed. He did not stain his most sacred profession with any spot or blemish, in manners of life; but, as was incumbent on an upright man, he maintained a demeanour in harmony with his calling and office. As became a diligent teacher, he instructed the youth intrusted to his charge with assiduity and zeal. For these reasons we entreat all and sundries to speak and think of the same James Arminius, D.D., a man of blessed memory, in such a manner as his erudition, his work performed in this our Academy, and his excellence, deserve. Which testimony we have ordered to be certified by the hand of our secretary, and to be further ratified and confirmed by our common seal.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'Compared with the original, and copied in terms of the same order of the Rector Magnific and the Senatus Academicus, by</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'Daniel Heinsius.</span>'<br /><br />To this very honourable testimonial of the Senatus, which is preserved to this day among the archives of the Leyden Academy, it may be well to add some individual testimonies with which several very eminent men, unfettered by the partialities of sect, honoured him both during his life, and after his death.<br /><br />The truly illustrious Scaliger, though sufficiently chary of praising others, calls him '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">a very great man.</span>' Meursius assigns him '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">a most penetrating intellect and judgment.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide Scaligerana. Meursii Athenae Bat. pag. 177.</span>]. The very celebrated Drusius classes him among '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">the learned and candid men</span>' to whose judgment he readily submitted his writings.<br /><br />In that epistle to the States-General, in which the distinguished Baud dedicates to their name his elegiac poem on the death of Arminius, he calls him '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">his reverend colleague, an excellent man, whom, when alive, he embraced in his sincere affection, and whom, now that he is dead, he continued to esteem as a man abounding in extraordinary endowments of mind and learning'; and in a letter to Uitenbogaert he follows up his praises of the deceased with these words: 'He was never legitimately convicted of, or condemned for, any error. Yea, to his last breath he adorned the post which by the decree of the curators and of our rulers he had obtained, and he died in the possession of rightful office; so that all good men, for the best of reasons, ought to cherish his memory with every feeling of favourable regard. For myself, I am left with a mournful sense of his loss; and nothing did I so eagerly desire as to see that day on which his innocence might be vindicated from rumours so invidiously circulated, and so rashly believed.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. pag. 239.</span>].<br /><br />The celebrated Anthony Thysius, also, between whom and Arminius, while alive, much intimacy subsisted, was wont, on repeated occasions, to declare respecting him, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he had never seen a mail endowed with more or with greater virtues, and chargeable with fewer or more trivial faults.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. pag. 327.</span>]. Richard Thompson, too, that great luminary of the English Church, making mention of Arminius in a certain letter to Dominic Baud, dated July 27, 1605, thus speaks: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">What you write concerning Arminius I gratefully acknowledge, although the fame of that man is not so imperfectly known among us as you seem to imagine. For even to me he was formerly very well known, before he had yet become a professor among you; and from the time that he did, he began to be well known in this country and many others besides. Hence as often as any scholars visited us from your country, our professors made diligent inquiry respecting Arminius. I am truly glad, therefore, on behalf of your Academy, which contains so great a man.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. pag. 148.</span>]. To this may be added the testimony of John Buxtorf, professor in the Academy of Basle, who, on being apprised of his death, wrote to Uitenbogaert in these terms: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">The unlooked-for extinction of so truly great a luminary of the far-famed Belgium as James Arminius, fills, as it well may, my mind with grief, both as a common calamity to the Clmrch of Christ, and as a melancholy breaking-off of the first approaches I had made towards the acquaintance of so great a man. For I hoped to see him put in that place in my esteem which was occupied by that illustrious hero, the learned Scaliger, of pious memory, who, — for me, alas, too suddenly, — has also been snatched from the stage of time.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. pag. 244.</span>].<br /><br />The very erudite Isaac Causabon, unites also in this tribute to Arminius. In a letter of his sent from Paris to Samuel Naeranus, dated July 28, 1610, these words occur: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">That Arminius, now in glory, of whom you make mention, was a great man, I do not doubt; although I have never as yet found any of our pastors who did not regard him as an infamous heretic, — their standard of truth being the opinion of Calvin. For Calvin I am conscious of a profound respect; but still I cannot away with those who rancorously hate all who dissent from him.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ib. p. 249</span>]. Nay, M. Martinius himself, who was afterwards present at the Synod of Dort, and was no mean member, — and into whose bosom Arminius, a few weeks before his death, and already sick, had poured his complaints respecting the calumnies that were fabricated against him,—expressed this thoroughly candid and unsophisticated opinion of the man : '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">He seemed to me,</span>' says he, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">to be a man that truly feared God; most erudite, most practised in theological controversies; mighty in the Scriptures; very circumspect, and precise in applying philosophical terms to theological subjects.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ib. p. 238.</span>].<br /><br />At length, that the memorial of so dear a head might never be lost to after ages, his relatives published his portrait, cut in brass, with this inscription:<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Qui nunc per altas aurei caeli domes</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Regnat beatus, et suo junctus Deo</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Humana celsus speruit, et nescit simul,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Sic Hospes, ora Magnus Arminius tulit.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Caelare mores atque dotes iugeni</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Doctumque pectus, quod fuit (sed beu fuit!)</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Magnus nequivit artifex: et quid manus,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Efferre cum non lingua, lion stilus queant.</span>'<br /><br />[<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">These Latin verses may be thus rendered into English:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Beyond these orbs that gild the etherial dome,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Joined to his God, his toils and conflicts o'er,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">The great Arminius, in that blissful home,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Still lives and reigns, though seen on earth no more.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Such, stranger, were the traits which here he wore:</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">But ah! to sketch the beauties of that heart,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Aud learned mind, whose loss we now deplore,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Transcends the able limner's loftiest art.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">What neither pen can write, nor <span style="font-style: italic;">tongue </span>can say,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">The feebler <span style="font-style: italic;">hand </span>presumes not to pourtray.</span>—TR.</span>]<br /><br />Among those of his countrymen who stood high in rank and office, he had attached most closely to himself these honourable Senators and Burgomasters, namely, Nicholas Cromhout, Adrian Junius, Sebastian Egberts, Rombout Hogerbeets, and one who of all his defenders and patrons held by no means the last place, William Bardesius, Lord of Warmhusen. This man cherished and evinced a stedfast affection for Arminius; when debilitated under his slow and lingering malady, with the utmost affection he took him to his manor as soon as his disease, and the state of the climate, and intervals of respite would permit; and after the removal of Arminius from this lower stage, he showed the same kindness to his widow and afflicted family, and embodied it in many substantial proofs.<br /><br />In addition to John Uitenbogaert, so often mentioned in this memoir, — whom he was wont to call his <span style="font-style: italic;">sheet-anchor</span>, as one to whom he might betake himself for counsel and aid, — among the friends who were knit to him in bonds of special intimacy, the following held a principal place, namely, the celebrated John Drusius, Conrad Vorstius, Anthony Thysius, John Halsberg, Peter Bertius, Adrian Borrius, John Arnold Corvinus, and other two whom he loved as a brother and a son: to wit, Rembert and Simon Episcopius, the former a merchant of Amsterdam, of cultivated understanding and exalted piety, the latter the most distinguished of his disciples, and who, at a subsequent period, in consideration of the extraordinary endowments of mind and genius which Divine Providence had heaped upon him, was judged worthy to fill the office of his deceased preceptor.<br /><br />These are the things which I have judged necessary to be said respecting James Arminius, whose piety and simple virtue never courted any celebrity on the earth, much less that a sect should be called by his name. This, indeed, after all things had become convulsed, actually happened subsequently to his death; the Christian community having suffered a lamentable rent, for which, as matters now stand, — unless God interpose in behalf of his Church, — the long-looked-for day of remedy may not speedily arrive.<br /><br />THE END.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-11192093125770130132009-01-13T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:41:42.753-08:00Chapter 13 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 13, Part 2 of 3 (p. 306-310).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />As during his life, so after his death, he underwent judgments, on the part of many, of the most conflicting kind. Scarcely had Peter Bertius paid the last honours to him in a funeral oration, when Gomarus broke out against his deceased colleague, and the eulogiser of his virtues; and in a treatise which he published against him, he detracted much from the merits of both. Yea, the very poem in which the honourable Hugh Grotius had celebrated Arminius, was to him a great eyesore; the following verses, in particular, drew from him some bitter remarks:<br /><br />Indigniore parte fractus et languens,<br />Meliore sospes, ilia millibus multis<br />Monstrata per te regna SOLUS arderes.<br /><br />[<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">'Broken and powerless in thy meaner part (the body,) but sound in thy nobler part (the soul,) thou wert all on fire (TOTUS arderes) to gain those heavenly kingdoms to which, to many thousands, thou hadst pointed the way.' Such was the meaning of Grotius. But the blundering substitution, by the printer, of 'SOLUS,' 'alone,' for 'TOTUS,' 'entire,' made him represent Arminius as the only man of his order who cherished those heavenly aspirations. We have given a metrical version of (Grotius's Elegiac poem at the end. The part here quoted will be found in the 19th and 20th stanzas.—TR.</span>]<br /><br />That word SOLUS had excited much ill-feeling against this most celebrated poet, and also in relation to Arminius himself; the truth being, that owing to the negligence of the compositor, or some other who superintended the publication, that word had crept in, TOTUS being the word which should have occupied its place,—a circumstance of which Grotius himself informed Gomarus in the following letter (now published for the first time), in which he appropriately takes upon himself the defence of his elegiac poem:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">To that Reverend and most distinguished man, Francis Gomarus, professor of theology in the Leyden Academy:</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'I suppose, Reverend Sir, that you have seen my verses on the death of Arminius, in which if there be anything that has pleased you, it will be very gratifying to me. But what has, I understand, proved displeasing to you, is also, I assure you, displeasing to me. I had written to the effect that your colleague, overwhelmed as he was with affliction towards the end, was <span style="font-style: italic;">altogether (totum)</span>, meaning <span style="font-style: italic;">as far as in him lay</span>, inflamed with the desire of the better life in heaven. What evil hand it was that out of my word <span style="font-style: italic;">totus </span>(whole) made <span style="font-style: italic;">solus </span>(sole) I do not know; a mistake so foolish, as it appears to me, that it can admit of no good sense. Whoever he is, I marvel at his audacity and stupidity in being so awkwardly officious in regard to the production of another. And even if any emendation had been required, I ought to have been consulted. Immediately after the publication, I uttered the complaint to the most learned Heinsius, and other friends, that my publishers had betrayed in this place a lack of fidelity, as in many other places they had betrayed a lack of diligence.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'At all events, what I proposed to myself in praising Arminius was this, that to the man to whom when living I could refuse no kind of service, (for I knew him, though only as I knew many others, without being on terms of close intimacy,) I should, now that he is dead, render this tribute, — which I was conscious of being able with all sincerity to do, — to that far-from-ordinary cast of genius, and transparent kind of eloquence which I always admired in him. I added that both in those things in which he defended the truth so strenuously against the Pope, and in those other things in which it was more possible for him to err, he did nothing from a hardened impulse contrary to the dictates of conscience. This was a judgment which charity dictated to me; as also that other, namely, that Arminius, particularly as death drew near, had bent his wishes towards the peace of the Church.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'But as to the points of difference between you and Arminius, and between many good men, with these I am neither sufficiently acquainted, nor, if I were, would I rashly intermeddle. That matter has its own appropriate judges. To us, occupied as we are with other things, it is allowable, as I trust, with the kind favour of God, to continue ignorant in respect to many things, and in respect to many others to withhold our assent. But although I do not build on human authority, this nevertheless I am free to avow, that in those points on which I entertain doubt, it is not easy for me to become wrenched from the opinions of those whom the Church has hitherto acknowledged to have been the pioneers of her restored purity. Many precepts, in particular, of Doctor Francis Junius, whose memory I hold sacred, remain indelibly in my mind. But then, in all such controversies I invariably incline to that side which attributes most to divine grace, and least to ourselves. These dissensions grieve me; but the Church has never been long without them, and never will. It remains that we bear one with another, and that, among the many things which human infirmity renders uncertain, we hold those for certain on which rests the hope of our salvation.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'Meanwhile, Reverend Sir, I pray God that he may direct your labours towards that which I doubt not is your aim — the tranquillity of the Church and the confirmation of sound doctrine.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'One who regards your name with the utmost respect,</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">'H. Grotius.</span>'<br /><br />But those same adversaries with whom he had so often, on past occasions, come into collision, treading in the footsteps of Gomarus, traduced him as '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">a man, indeed, of somewhat practised intellect, but whom nothing pleased except what recommended itself by some appearance of novelty; so much so, that he appeared to loathe many doctrines received in the churches, even on this very ground, that they had been received.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefat. Synodi. Dordac.</span>]. Among strangers, too, were found some who, misled by a certain blind prejudice, and attributing undue importance to the clamours of sundry zealots, characterised him as '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">an enemy of God; a man of crafty intellect; who had done all things dexterously; who, Ham-like, had exposed the nakedness of his fathers; and who, in a detestable manner, through the side of the holiest leaders of the Reformation, had dealt a stab at the very body of the Reformed Church.</span>' John Hoornbeck writes that Arminius was much too confident in his own speculations, and showed himself much too eager to demolish all else. And more: appropriating the words of Tacitus, he calls him a covenant-breaker who, forswearing the faith which he had pledged both to God and the Church, had begun, first secretly, then openly, both by himself, and by his disciples and abettors, to disturb and subvert the faith of the churches, and the doctrine of Christ; and not the churches only, but civil politics also, in his nefarious attempt; and that he would have succeeded, had not God interposed his aid at that perilous crisis [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide Arn. Poelenb. Epist. ad C. H. in qua liber 8. summae controversiarum Hoornbeequii, refellitur Amstelod. 1655. pag. 5.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-6750683059910621632009-01-12T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:43:30.221-08:00Chapter 13 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 13, Part 1 of 3 (p. 300-305).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER XIII.<br /><br />SKETCH OF THE PERSON AND CHARACTER OF ARMINIUS; WITH A VARIETY OF TESTIMONIES IN REGARD TO HIM BOTH FROM FRIENDS AND FOES. A.D. 1609.<br /><br />On the day on which Arminius was interred, Peter Bertius, regent of the theological college, and a most accomplished man, publicly conducted the solemnities by a funeral oration in honour of Arminius, in the theological hall. In this oration (from which, in the present little work, we have very freely drawn,) he gives some brief account of the life and excellences of the deceased; adding towards the close, that his blessed memory ought to be embalmed in the Christian Church, with this elogium: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">There lived in Holland a man, whom they that did not know him could not sufficiently esteem; whom they who did not esteem him had never sufficiently known.</span>'<br /><br />The same kind office which Bertius performed in his prose oration, was also publicly rendered in song by these world-renowned men and consummate poets, Dominic Baud and Hugh Grotius, whose elegiac poems we have subjoined at the close of this memoir. To these we add a distinguished little poem of Daniel Heinsius, omitted in the collection of his poems, — for what reasons, it is not difficult to conjecture, — in which, by means of a comparison which he institutes between Arminius, the champion of the ancient liberty of the Batavians, and our Arminius, he thus celebrates, in a strain of singular elegance, the service rendered by the latter in withstanding the tyranny of the Romanists:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">In Obitum Rev. D. Jacobi Arminii, Summi Pontificiorum Oppugnatoris.</span>'<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Ingentem Dominum rerum Martisque nepotem</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Germanus olim fregit Armini vigor,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Ausus inaccessam Romano opponere gentem,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Nihil timere doctus et fortis mori.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Horruit et nostro Tiberis se subdidit Albi,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Martisque gentem faedus invasit timor.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Quintiliae cecidere acies, terramque momordit</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Ferox juventus, unico minor viro.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Nunc alter Batavo de sanguine fortis et acer,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Et veritate armatus, et fandi potens.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Mendacem invasit sublimi pectore Romam,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Sic fuit in fatis: laudem hanc Germinia servas,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Bis Roma nostros non tulisti Arminios.</span>'<br /><br />[<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">The name of this ancient patriot was Hermann (i.e., chiefman, or chieftain), latinised by Tacitus and other Roman historians into Arminius. He flourished at the very commencement of our era, and withstood the power of imperial Rome in many a hard-fought field. The particular exploit here alluded to was the total destruction, by the hand of Arminius and his German warriors, of three Roman legions under Quintilius Varus, who, with their general, fell almost to a man in the woody pass of the Teutoburger Wald — an event which struck terror into the heart of Rome, the aged Emperor Augustus calling out in his grief for Varus to give him back his legions. This will sufficiently explain the allusions that occur in this little piece, the conception of which was furnished by the coincidence in the two names, and in Rome being in each case the party opposed. The versification is exquisite to a degree which renders translation an uninviting and somewhat perilous task. But for the sake of the English reader, in whose special service we are now engaged, we will adventure the following:—</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">On the death of the Rev. Doctor James Arminius, a renowned opposer of the Papists.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Rome's lordly legions, sprung of Mars,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Of old the valiant Hermann broke;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Untaught to fear, untamed by wars,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">The dauntless Germans spurned the yoke.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Old Tiber, trembling at the shock,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Bowed to our Elbe his crested pride;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Hosts melted under Hermann's stroke.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">The flower of Rome in battle died;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">And Varus' legions sunk undone,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Crushed by the giant might of one.</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Behold another Hermann strong!</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">A Hermann of Batavian blood;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Begirt with truth, of golden tongue,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">And lofty, lion hearted mood;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Apostate Rome he well withstood;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">But now in death our hero sleeps,—</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">So Heaven decreed, all-wise and good,—</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">And o'er his tomb Germania weeps;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">But 'Rome!' she boasts, 'Thou Queen of pride!</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Thee have my Hermanns twice defied.'</span>—TR.</span>]<br /><br />It now remains that we subjoin a brief sketch of Arminius, descriptive at once of his person and his mind. In bodily stature he did not exceed the medium size. His eyes were black and sparkling, indicating acuteness of mind and genius. His countenance was serene. His bodily temperament was sanguineous; his limbs wall compacted, and at the prime of life, somewhat robust. His voice was slender, indeed, but sweet, musical, and sharp. He was eloquent in an admirable degree: if any subject was to be embellished, if any discussed, it was done with distinctness; the pronunciation and intonation of voice being thoroughly adapted to the sense [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Baudart Hist.</span>]. As respects his general bearing, he was courteous and affable towards all, respectful to superiors, hospitable, cheerful, — and noway disinclined among his friends to harmless sallies of wit, by way of mental relaxation; but in all that constitutes the man of gravity, the Christian, and the consummate teacher of the church, as far as human infirmity could permit, he was second to none. He adored with profound veneration the supreme and ever-blessed God; and never allowed a day to pass without pious meditation, and perusal of the Sacred Scriptures, making a commencement with fervid prayers; and in order to make the greater progress in the cultivation of piety, and the truth, he occasionally followed up these prayers with fasting. He wished to be, rather than to appear pious; and regarded nothing as of greater moment than to regulate all his actions, not by the opinion of others, but by the dictate of a pure conscience; and to confirm by his own example the truth of his own maxim, in which he pre-eminently delighted: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Bona Conscientia Paradisus</span>' — '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">A Good Conscience is a Paradise.</span>'<br /><br />As respects the cultivation of piety, and the regard to be paid to conscience, he also acknowledged that much on his part was due to the ecclesiastical function to which, in the very flower of his youth he had already been destined. For this reason, he marked off for special castigation those persons who, — as if they bore universal knowledge about with them locked up in the cabinet of their own breast, — judged themselves entitled, on being asked their opinion on any subject, to speak forth none other than oracular utterances to be received with open ears and obsequious minds. No object, moreover, lay nearer to his heart than to see the brands of discord extinguished, and the convulsed Christian community brought back to an agreement of mutual forbearance as respects controversies which do not shake the foundations of the true soul-saving faith. So intense was this desire, that the intemperate rage of denouncing dissentients, how trivial soever the point of difference, in matters of religious opinion, not unfrequently brought the tears to his eyes. Hence he often repeated, with deep emotion, the lament of Hilary, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that while one is launching anathemas upon another, and driving him from the communion of the Church, scarcely a single soul is gained to Christ.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Uitenb. Hist. pag. 483.</span>].<br /><br />He rarely indulged in rhetorical garniture, and in the fragrant fineries of the Greeks, either because his nature was averse to such artifices, or because he deemed it derogatory to the majesty of divine things to call into requisition those classic names and adscititious embellishments, when the naked truth was sufficient for its own defence. He set a high value, however, as appears from his correspondence with Drusius [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. pag. 33.</span>], on the knowledge of the Hebrew and Oriental literature, by which not only the phrases of the sacred language, but also the antiquities of the ancient church of the Jews, with their rites, manners, and customs, both sacred and civil, might be discovered and explained. This he judged useful, and necessary to the ideal of a consummate theologian; and with those who attached little importance to these and kindred studies, he was in no small measure displeased. A keen debater on points connected with religion, and expert in using the subtilties of adversaries against themselves, he was in other respects disinclined to controversy, when no necessity for it existed; and he strove to make every doctrine, and all the powers of his mind and genius, subserve the aim of leading a life worthy of a Christian man. There was no air of haughtiness in his teaching; he was a mild and perspicuous interpreter of his thoughts; in argument circumspect; and so little inclined to self-confidence, that he refused to gratify the wishes of his importunate friends when they urged him to publish some work he had composed. On this very account, indeed, he was, wont to tax with no small measure of imprudence his eminent colleague, L. Trelcatius, junior, for having published, in his youthful years, A Body of Christian Theology in which, in his judgment, he had written many things, indeed, well, but many more that were little in harmony with the Sacred Scriptures [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Arminii Epist. ad Uitenb. 3 Kal. Septemb. 1604</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-81300336697499837572009-01-11T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:47:57.791-08:00Chapter 12 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 12, Part 3 of 3 (p. 289-299).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />But as the shattered health of Arminius, which betrayed itself by too evident symptoms under this very conference, appeared unable to sustain any longer the effort of debate, it pleased the States to break it short. They also ordered the disputants to deliver each his own opinion, drawn up in writing, with the arguments on which it rested, and a refutation of the contrary, within the space of fourteen days; to remain in possession of the States till the Provincial Synod. There were present at the Conference from the city of Amsterdam, the honourable rulers, Jacob Boelius Cornelius P. F. Hoofdius, Cronhout, Sebestian Egberts, Jonas Witzen, and Elb. Verius, Syndic of Amsterdam [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. vernacula Jac Arminii ad R. Episcop. 26 Aug. 1609.</span>]. After the conference had thus come to a close, it further seemed good to the States, to summon before them apart, the assessors of each doctor, that they might severally state their opinions, not only in regard to the importance of these controversies, but also as to the remedies by which they might be allayed. On this point, however, there was the utmost diversity of sentiment. Those who stood by Gomarus exaggerated the importance of the controversies, and indicated no remedy other than the convocation, as speedily as possible, of a Provincial or National Synod. On the other hand, the assessors and coadjutors of Arminius, on being heard by themselves, gave it as their opinion, that 'that question concerning justification was either of no importance, or at most of very trivial importance, and could be settled without difficulty, if acrimony and ill-will were but laid aside, and due homage paid to peace and truth. With regard to the opinion of Arminius concerning Predestination, and questions therewith connected, considering that it was in harmony with Sacred Scripture, as well as simple, easily intelligible, and free of subtleties, they thought that it commended itself as much the better adapted of the two for the ends of consolation and instruction. In favour of Arminius was the entire tenor of the gospel; while the opinion of Gomarus transcended the gospel: and he himself, in a certain thesis, had ultroneously confessed that the doctrine of predestination, as he taught it, did not, properly speaking, pertain to the gospel.<br /><br />The Rev. J. Uitenbogaert next, in name of all the rest, discoursed, in an oration replete with varied erudition and eloquence, concerning the causes of the growing dissensions, and how they were to be remedied; what care in these controversies belonged to the States; and how far in this matter their power extended [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide Orationem hanc in Uitenbog. His. lib. 3. p. 480.</span>]. But particularly in regard to the Synod, which most believed to be the sheet-anchor of the imperilled Church, he declared '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that it was by no means useless, yea, that it might, according to the state of times and circumstances, be necessary, provided care were taken to prevent, — what the famous Beza elsewhere affirmed of the assemblies of the Ancient Church, — the devil from acting in it as president; to foreclose which danger there did not exist any remedy more effectual, than that the illustrious Rulers, according to the authority which they possessed, should convoke a Synod thoroughly free and just, in which not only Arminius and Gomarus, but all who may happen to have some doubts and strictures on the controversies referred to, may be fully heard, and their reasons duly weighed according to the Sacred Volume. It ought, moreover, to be taken into consideration what was the aim which that Synod should, propose to itself. Under the impulse of that prejudiced sentiment and high tide of excitement by which at this time they were borne along, the greater part had this only as the object of their desire, that the majority should condemn the minority, and pronounce judgment in reference to these controversies in a manner altogether definitive and peremptory; and what sort of evils would thenceforth rush from that fountain, no candid discerner of events could be at a loss to conjecture. This Synod, therefore, ought to be convened for friendly conference between parties opposed to each other on controverted points, and to see whether they might not be able to agree among themselves. But if there seemed nothing to warrant the hope that this matter would be disposed of so promptly, and at one assembly, the safety of the State and Church would be best consulted were the illustrious States, by a formula of mutual forbearance on points that are less essential, to put an end in some measure, if only for a time, to such ecclesiastical contentions.</span>'<br /><br />Shortly after these transactions, Gomarus transmitted in writing, within the time prescribed by the States, those opinions which he had orally defended before their assembly [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Prefat. Act. Synod.</span>]. Arminius, however, on being conveyed home from the Hague, had scarcely composed himself to the task of obeying the mandates of the rulers, when the disease in its malignant form again attacked him anew, and that with an aggravated severity proportioned to the increased intensity it had gained from a harassed mind and debilitated energies. But he in the highest degree consoled himself, according to God and the testimony of his conscience, with this one reflection, that in the supreme Assembly of all Holland he had been patiently listened to by his most clement lords, to whose prudence he attributed so much as to encourage the hope that, in the event of his death, there would not be wanting among them those who, once satisfied of the justice of his cause, would throw around it the protective influence of their wisdom and favour. He sent, however, by letter, on the 12th September, a modest excuse to the States as to his inability to fulfil their commands by the appointed day; in which he stated, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he was confined to a sick-bed, after having already drawn up a considerable part of the prescribed document, which now, — such being the will of the Divine Disposer, — he was obliged to break off. His having been heard on a previous occasion, and the whole case at that time having been exhibited in writing, might be accepted in discharge of the present necessity. If, however, they at all desired the portion he had executed, he would take care either that, in the event of his being by the grace of Christ restored to health, they should have the whole perfect and entire, or that, in the event of his decease, they should have it in its abrupt and imperfect form. With regard, however, to the Confession he had given forth, so far was he from entertaining any doubt respecting it, that, on the contrary, he stedfastly believed it to be throughout in accordance with Scripture; he therefore persisted in it, being prepared with this very faith to appear, even at that very moment, before the tribunal of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Judge of the living and of the dead.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Uitenbog. Hist. pag. 470.—Bertii Oratio pag. 36.</span>].<br /><br />Meanwhile, his disease gathered strength every day, in spite of every effort to arrest it by those most eminent and practised physicians, Doctors Pavius, Sebastian Egberts, Henry Saelius, and Reyner Bontius. The virulence of the malady, moreover, too deeply seated for medical art and appliance to eradicate it, daily developed new symptoms — fever, cough, enlargement of the hypochondria, difficulty of respiration, oppression from food, broken sleep, atrophy, and arthritis, which allowed the sufferer no rest. In complication with these were intestinal pains, — in the ilium and colon; together with affection of the left optic nerve, and dimness of the left eye. When this last affection became known, there were some who, abating nothing even then of their wonted rancour against him, did not scruple to interpret it as one of the judgments dealt out to the contemners of the Divine Majesty. To give some speciousness to this outrage, they bandied about, with application to Arminius, these words of the inspired prophet Zechariah [Chap. xiv. 12.], in which he speaks of the wasting away of the eyes and of the whole body: '<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">This shall be the plague wherewith the Lord will smite all the people that have fought against Jerusalem; their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.</span>' To this passage, they appended another from the same prophetic book [Chap. xi. 17.]. '<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Woe to the idol shepherd that leaveth the flock! the sword shall be upon his arm, and upon his right eye: his arm shall be clean dried up, and his right eye shall be utterly darkened.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">'And yet,' says Bertius, in allusion to this barbarous diversion, 'it was not "his right eye" that was affected, but his left; nor was it "utter darkness," but only a dimness; nor was his arm "clean dried up," but it was swollen. His tongue, too, articulately fulfilled its office to the very last. In this manner things above, and things below, on the right and the left, divine and human, are alike made to subserve the will of these wretched oracular expounders of the mysteries of Providence! '—<span style="font-style: italic;">Orat. in obit. Arminii.</span>—TR.</span>].<br /><br />There were some also who, by a play on the name <span style="font-style: italic;">James Armimus</span> (Jacobus Arminius) made him out to be a <span style="font-style: italic;">friend of this vain world</span>. (Vani Orbis Amicus.) While others, subsequently, with the view of pouring ridicule upon this anagram, worked up another from the same name, with the addition of a single letter [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">The letter <span style="font-style: italic;">h</span>, which occurs in his original name Hermanns.</span>], in which he is himself introduced as saying, <span style="font-style: italic;">I have had a care for Sion</span>. (habui Curam Sionis.) Meanwhile Arminius, though day by day the violence of the disease shook his frame more and more, preserved unshaken his constancy of mind and placidity of temper, and retained his power of articulate utterance to the very close of life. Nor did he betray the least abatement of his wonted cheerfulness of aspect, and kindliness of disposition; charging his afflicted and anguish-stricken wife to be resigned in spirit, and very often exhorting her to put her trust in the God of the widow.<br /><br />Very frequently, too, and with the utmost fervour, did he pour out his supplications unto God, both for himself, and for the prosperity and peace of the church; and in all his conversations he testified his unmoved confidence, and thoroughly unshaken hope in Christ the Saviour. And if his brethren addressed themselves to prayer on his behalf, and he happened at the time to be overpowered by pain, he would request them now and then to pause, until he had recovered himself, and become able along with them to go through this solemn exercise.<br /><br />Among many forms of prayer which he specially enjoyed, and frequently used, the following were prominent: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">O Lord Jesus, thou faithful and merciful High Priest, who consentedst to be in all things tempted like as we are, yet without sin, that, taught by this experience how hard it is to obey God in sufferings, thou mightest be touched with a feeling of our infirmities, have compassion on me, succour me, thy servant prostrate, and pressed with so many maladies. O God of my salvation, make my soul fit for thy heavenly kingdom, and my body for the resurrection. Great Shepherd of the sheep, who, through the blood of the everlasting covenant hast been brought again from the dead, O Lord and Saviour Jesus, be present with me, an infirm and afflicted sheep of thine.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide Bertii Orat. Funebr. in obitum J. Arminii pag. 40.</span>]. Very often to the friends at his bedside did he repeat the twentieth and following verse of the 13th chapter of Hebrews, from which he had drawn this last form of prayer; and this passage of Holy Writ he used to utter with such ardour of mind and overflowing fervour of spirit, that the Rev. Bartholomew Praevostius, a disciple most worthy of such a preceptor, and who was afterwards pastor of the Remonstrant church in Amsterdam, was wont to declare that it remained ever after indelibly fixed in his memory, and vividly present to his mind.<br /><br />About the same time, also, from a desire to pay the last offices of piety to his preceptor, the very learned Simon Episcopius hastened from Franeker to Holland, and for several days and nights kept close by his bedside, interchanging much conversation with him on the subject of religion, the state of the Church, the knowledge of the Saviour, and the efficacy of his death and resurrection [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide vitam Episcop. a Ph. Limburg. concionibus ejus praefixam.</span>].<br /><br />Moreover, on being admonished by his physicians, as his strength declined, of the urgent propriety, considering the uncertain issues of life, of setting his house in order, and embodying in a last will whatever charges he might wish to leave, so little did he dread the approach of the fatal hour, that he resigned himself to death with truly admirable composure of mind, and set himself to transact whatever duty required of a Christian teacher and head of a family. At this solemn season, accordingly, he drew up a testament, truly Christian in its character; and dictated in it a brief statement of his aims and manner of life. Mark the following confession of the dying man, as a signal index and evidence of his piety.<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">First of all, I commend my soul, when it quits the body, into the hands of God its creator, and faithful preserver, in whose presence I testify that in simplicity and sincerity I have walked with a good conscience in my office and calling; very anxiously and scrupulously on my guard not to propound or teach aught which, by diligent application to the study of the Sacred Scriptures, I had not previously found to be in strictest harmony with these writings:— whatsoever things might prove conducive to the propagation and extension of the truth of the Christian religion, of the worship of the true God, of piety in general, and holy conversation among men, — in fine, to the tranquillity and peace, according to the Word of God, which becomes the Christian name; excluding the Papacy, with which no unity of faith, no bond of piety or Christian peace, can be maintained.</span>'<br /><br />These things having been transacted, and all his affairs set in order, the few days that yet remained were spent in the invocation of Christ the Saviour, and in meditation on the better life. During this period, his reverend brethren, J. Uitenbogaert and Adrian Borrius, who were each closely knit to him in the bonds of a most intimate friendship contracted many years before, and by a community of vicissitudes of a varied and critical kind, excelled all others in their assiduous attentions, which were to him most grateful, and refreshed his spirit by their much relished conversations and prayers. But at length, on the 19th of October, about noon, amidst the prayers of his friends, with his eyes upturned towards heaven, he peacefully yielded up to his creator God, his soul, brimful of this world's woes, already longing for release, and enjoying a foretaste of celestial bliss; several present exclaiming, as he breathed out his spirit, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">O my soul, let me die the death of the righteous!</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Bertii Oratio Funebr. pag. 43.—Et Uitenb. Hist. pag. 483.</span>].<br /><br />Thus died James Arminius, having completed a period of six years in the professorship, and in the 49th year of his age — a truly mournful loss, not only to the Academy and the Christian community, but also, and most of all, to his widow and nine children, of whom the eldest at that time had little more than attained the 17th year of his age. Among these were two little daughters, Gertrude and Angelica; the rest were males — Hermann, Peter, John, Lawrence, James, William, and Daniel; of whom, Lawrence, on reaching manhood, became a merchant in the city of Amsterdam, while Daniel prosecuted the medical art with the highest reputation. The remaining sons, after the decease of their beloved father, died in the very flower of their youth.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-70765388621250037192009-01-10T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:46:24.194-08:00Chapter 12 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 12, Part 2 of 3 (p. 283-289).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Meanwhile, as the rising controversies, which had now for some time been transferred from the schools to the pulpit, — yea and to the market-places, the streets, and the porticos, — engaged the minds of men alike of the highest and of the lowest rank; and while many, through ignorance, were assigning to Arminius the opinion of Gomarus, and to Gomarus the opinion of Arminius, some person, in the course of this year (1609), with the view of enabling every one to understand more accurately the state of this controversy, published a translation from the Latin into the vernacular tongue of the Theses of both the professors on the subject of Predestination, as they had been defended by them respectively a few years before (viz. in 1604). These were followed by a Dialogue from the pen of R. Donteklok, minister of Delft, in which he asserted that the opinion of Arminius was altogether opposed to the Reformed doctrine as received in the Low Countries, and was such as could not be tolerated in any divine; while the opinion of Gomarus, on the other hand, although in his judgment it soared beyond the prevailing opinion, was nevertheless fairly reconcileable therewith. This Dialogue was promptly refuted, and the fame of Arminius vindicated, by J. Arnold Corvinus, minister of the church at Leyden, in a pamphlet he published under the title of <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">A Christian and Serious Admonition to Christian Peace</span>. To this pamphlet not long after, Donteklok replied. The friends of Arminius, too, with the view of dissipating the very sinister rumours with which he had been assailed, translated about this time from the Latin, and submitted to the judgment of the public, his <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Theses on The Providence of God concerning Evil</span>; <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">On Man's Free Will and its Efficacy</span>; and also those <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">On Indulgences and Purgatory</span>, which were put out against the Papists. But these minor publications so far from promoting the peace of the Church, operated, as the discord daily increased, like oil poured upon the flame.<br /><br />Taking this into consideration, it pleased the States of Holland and Westfriesland that a friendly conference should be held anew before their assembly betwixt Gomarus and Arminius, in regard to the articles controverted between them, in which either professor for himself might choose four ministers of whose counsels it should be competent to him to avail himself. Arminius made choice of John Uitenbogaert of the Hague, Adrian Borrius of Leyden, Nicolas Grevinkovius of Rotterdam, and Adolphus Venator of Alkmaar. Gomarus, on the other hand, chose R. Acronius of Schiedam, James Eoland of Amsterdam, John Bogard of Haarlem, and Festus Hommius of Leyden.<br /><br />The first and second days were consumed by various wranglings and tergiversations. In particular, Gomarus thought that Adolphus Venator was not worthy to take part in the convention, inasmuch as he had been ordered by the Classis of Alkmaar to desist for the time being from the discharge of ecclesiastical functions, on the ground of impure doctrine, and of his refusal to subscribe to the Confession and Catechism; for which reasons he demanded that another should be substituted in his place. The States rejoined that the censure thus inflicted by the Classis contravened the decree which they (the States) had issued with respect to the revisal of these formularies of agreement; and this censure, having thus been rendered by them null and void, availed nothing against Adolphus in any respect.<br /><br />A lengthened discussion then ensued on the subject of this revisal; the States demanding that this point should be handled first, as the hinge on which their own decree turned as to the holding of a Synod. After the two professors had debated the matter at full length, Uitenbogaert took occasion, in a weighty speech, to expound his mind also on this same point.<br /><br />At last, when about to enter upon the real question, Gomarus appealed from this political to an ecclesiastical tribunal, before which he was prepared to discuss the controverted points in the presence of delegates from the States [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Uitenbog. Hist. pag. 462.</span>].<br /><br />The States, on the other hand, refused to sustain any such appeal; told him to break off these tergiversations; and added, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that if he prolonged his pertinacious opposition they would see to what, in the circumstances, it was their duty to do.</span>' This brought Gomarus to dismiss his quibbles; and on the day following he declared his readiness to obey the mandate of the rulers, but on these conditions:—<br /><br />I. That this conference be conducted in writing, to be handed in on both sides.<br /><br />II. That these writings be delivered to the National Synod for their inspection and adjudication, in order that the right of judgment, in an ecclesiastical cause, might be reserved entire to the churches.<br /><br />III. That the conference commence with the subject of Justification [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefet. Act. Synod.</span>].<br /><br />After some discussion as to the order in which the various articles ought to be considered, Arminius at length gave his consent that the one to be first handled should be Justification. The States, however, ruled that the conference should be conducted viva voce; yet not to the exclusion of Writing, when used as an aid to the memory. They further engaged, in a public letter pledging themselves to that effect, that the cause, after they had investigated it in that conference, should be reserved to the judgment of a Provincial Synod, and that, for this end, all things that might there be transacted <span style="font-style: italic;">viva voce</span>, should subsequently be committed to writing, and that these documents would in due course be handed over to the Synod.<br /><br />Among the first articles treated of at this conference, the controversy concerning <span style="font-style: italic;">Justification </span>led the way; just as, on a previous occasion, it had also been discussed before the Supreme Court. This turned mainly on the sense of the apostle's phrase, that '<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">faith is imputed for righteousness</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Rom. iv. 5.</span>]. Both doctors agreed in holding that the passage referred to treated of faith properly so called, but differed on the question, whether faith was the instrument of justification? Gomarus held the affirmative. Arminius held the negative; maintaining that faith could not properly be called an instrument, seeing it was an action; or, if the name instrument must be claimed for it, it would then be the instrument, not of justification, which is an act of the Divine mind, but of the apprehension or reception of Christ as our Redeemer, which is a human act: and that faith is graciously regarded by God, in the act of justifying, as having already fulfilled its function [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Rom. iv. 5. Ex Epist. A Borrii ad G. Liv. non dum edita. 29 Septemb. 1609. Vide et Uitenb. Hist. pag. 469.</span>].<br /><br />In the second place they treated of <span style="font-style: italic;">Predestination</span>, and first of all, of the object of election and reprobation: whether God in electing and reprobating, in one and the same act, regarded his creatures as not yet created, — as in the void of nothing, — or, on the other hand, as created: further, if he regarded them as created, whether he regarded them as sinners, or otherwise; if, as sinners, whether as sinners solely by the sin of Adam, or on the other hand, as sinners defiled by other sins also: finally, and as the crowning point, whether he contemplated those to be chosen as also believing and penitent, and those to be reprobated as unbelieving and impenitent. Arminius maintained this, Gomarus the opposite; a variety of arguments being adduced on either side.<br /><br />The third place was occupied with the controversy <span style="font-style: italic;">concerning the grace of God and the free will of man</span>. Each acknowledged that man of himself, and by his own powers, could accomplish nothing whatever in the shape of saving good; nay, Arminius declared, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he admitted all the operations of divine grace whatsoever, which could be maintained as present in the conversion of man, provided that no grace were maintained which was irresistible.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefat. Act. Synod.</span>]. This Gomarus disputed; maintaining that, in the regeneration of man, a certain grace of the Holy Spirit was needed which should operate so efficaciously '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that, the resistance of the flesh being thereby overcome, as many as became partakers of this grace would be certainly and infallibly converted.</span>' He added that a great ambiguity lurked in the word <span style="font-style: italic;">irresistible</span>, and that the opinion, formerly condemned, of the Semi-pelagians and Synergists lay wrapped up in it.<br /><br />The last topic of discussion was the <span style="font-style: italic;">Perseverance of true believers</span>; and here the question was stirred, not indeed, whether the children of God can fall away from salvation, but whether a man who has once believed cannot, by any possibility, fall away from faith. This was a doctrine which Arminius declared he had by no means opposed, or meant to oppose; but he intimated that his mind was perplexed by several difficulties on this subject, and he adduced various reasons for the doubts he entertained. To these Gomarus replied; after which the disputants were asked whether any articles yet remained on which they mutually differed. Gomarus rejoined that there were several; namely, <span style="font-style: italic;">concerning Original Sin, concerning the providence of God, concerning the authority of the Holy Scriptures, concerning the certainty of Salvation, concerning the perfection of man in this life</span>, and various others, in regard to which he left it to the discretion of the illustrious States whether they should be discussed in this place, especially as they must again come under discussion in the Synod [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefat. Act. Synod.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-54675749847452236372009-01-09T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:45:26.597-08:00Chapter 12 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 12, Part 1 of 3 (p. 278-283).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER XII.<br /><br />EVER-INCREASING CONTENTIONS, AMID WHICH THE HEALTH OF ARMINIUS GIVES WAY; FINAL CONFERENCE AT THE HAGUE IN AUGUST 1609: HIS LAST ILLNESS AND DEATH. A.D. 1609.<br /><br />Meanwhile Arminius, by reason of incessant labours, assiduous studies, protracted sitting, and contests recurring without any intermission, had contracted hypochondriacal affections, which ripened at length into obstinate disease. This distemper, which had very long been latent in his internal parts, broke out with special violence on the 7th of February, in the following year. His members were affected by internal languor, and his stomach utterly debilitated; so much so, that his medical attendants at once saw it to be necessary to subject him to slow and cautious treatment. But although, at the commencement of the attack, the sufferer could scarcely drag his body along, nevertheless, afterwards, during some favourable intervals, he regained his vigour of mind, and intermitted nothing, as far as his infirm health would permit, of his readings, disputations, and other duties of his calling; nor was he ever neglectful of his own cause. Of this he gave brilliant evidence in a certain disputation which he publicly held a few months after, on the 25th July, Concerning the Call of Man to Salvation. On this occasion, Arminius acted a very spirited part; and in eloquent terms not only denied that irresistible and necessitating force which some of the Reformed represent God as exerting in the conversion of men, but further proceeded to prove that the Divine call turns on this, either that God supplies, or is ready to bestow, the power to perform that to which, in his call, he invites mankind. He further added, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he neither could, nor dared, to define the mode which the Holy Spirit employs in the conversion and regeneration of men. If any one will venture to do so, on him devolves the burden of proof. For himself, he could say in what manner conversion did not take place, but he could not say in what manner it did; for this only He knows who searches the deep things of God.</span>' To this it was objected that there was a certain kind of grace by which men are infallibly converted, and from this it was directly argued that conversion was necessitated; in answer to which, Arminius took occasion to discourse at some length on what the schoolmen call, though very improperly, the necessity of infallibility; and added, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the scholastics were not to him the standard of speech, or of faith, seeing that they began to exist only when Antichrist was in course of being revealed, and that their theology had not made way until the true and apostolic theology had been driven into exile.</span>'<br /><br />After a period of nearly two whole hours had been lengthened out by two opponents, a certain Papist, who passed off his name as Adrian Smetius, and whom some took for a priest, others for a Jesuit, boldly descended into the arena against Arminius, and assailed his opinion on the point in question with a variety of arguments. While Arminius was ever and anon replying to these with prompt and collected mind, Gomarus assumed various colours on the occasion; and that he might not present the appearance of a merely passive listener, he varied his gestures now and then; at one time taking notes; at another whispering something into the ear of Everard Vorstius, Professor of medicine, who sat next him; now casting his eyes over the audience, which was very large; and now muttering something between his lips. Nay, he looked as if he felt an intense desire to contradict the things advanced in the course of the disputation, but repressed himself; — after such a fashion, however, that these, or similar words, fell from him in the overflow of his indignation, — What impudence is this? Moreover, after the disputation had come to a close, he had scarcely reached the hall door, when he broke out in the words: The reins have been remarkably well loosened for the Papacy this day. Directly after, in like manner, making up to Arminius, he exclaimed in the presence and hearing of the Jesuit, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he had never, in the Academy, listened to such statements and disputations, by which the door was thrown so widely open to Popery.</span>' Arminius replied, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he had given satisfaction to his own conscience, and denied that what he had advanced made anything at all in favour of Popery.</span>' Gomarus forthwith rejoined '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he would refute these things, and that too in public.</span>' Arminius: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">If anything be said which is opposed to my conscience, I promise you that I, in my turn, will openly gainsay it.</span>' Gomarus: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I shall not be wanting in my duty to the cause.</span>' Arminius: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Neither shall I be wanting, I confidently trust. But let us test each other in due time, and to me it is certain that the opinion of an irresistible force will be found repugnant alike to the Sacred Scripture, to antiquity, and to our Confession and Catechism.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide his de hac disput. Epist. Borrii ad Epist. 30 Julii script. inter Epist. Eccles.</span>].<br /><br />After holding this disputation, he repaired to Oudewater with the view of recruiting his health; and there, on the very night which followed the debate just narrated, he was seized with a most violent paroxysm, which once more shattered his strength, and struck alarm into the minds of all who enjoyed his care and his intimacy. Simon Episcopius, in particular, who had by this time gone to Franeker, mainly for the sake of hearing the lectures of Drusius, felt very deeply affected by the adverse health of his great Preceptor (whom he was wont to address by the name of father), as these words to Arminius abundantly testify:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Reverend Doctor and esteemed Father:— Although I have not written you since my departure, I trust you will attribute this, not to any forgetfulness of you, or supine and ungrateful indifference to your claims, but partly to my assurance of the peculiar affection which I have very forcibly and confidently flattered myself you cherish towards me, and partly, and very principally, to my desire not to be officiously troublesome to you, already too much harassed; especially considering that over and above your serious and grave occupations, which, by a universal and simultaneous rush, are now, I well know, accumulating upon your head, you are ever and anon distracted by the oft-recurring agonies of an obstinate disease. In these circumstances, not having the boldness to address you, nor the ability to cheer and refresh you, I deemed it enough to convey to you my grateful remembrance, and the frequent expression of my affection, through those to whom I occasionally wrote. How I wish, Reverend Sir!— and O that God might grant,—that it may be permitted us to have a joyous remembrance of you in this truly abandoned age, to which God appears to have given promise of some remedy through your instrumentality. Would that it may not prove to have been promise merely! For how stands the case? Alas! amid our anxious longings, and repeated attempts to brace up our minds to the confidence of hope, the only intelligence we receive is that your disease has not yet abated, but holds obstinately on, and that it is irritated by the malignant and choleric conduct of certain parties which causes it to relapse with increased severity. For my part, if you will only concede to me the capability of weighing your circumstances with some measure of justice, and estimating, in some sort, at once the utility and the necessity of your prelections, you need be at no loss to imagine how deeply I am distressed by the present visitation. Ungrateful should I be were any day to pass over my head which did not, at frequent intervals, remind and admonish me of your disease, — a consideration, in truth, which so afflicts me from day to day, that, along with it, a sort of sympathetic participation of your malady ever affects and invades me. Would to God this went so far, that some alleviation or solace might thence redound to you! But perhaps it may not seem good to our God to bless any longer through your instrumentality this unwilling, ungrateful, and refractory world, which does not choose to know the things that make for its peace, or to recognise the tune of its visitation.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. pag. 298.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-71671835377574524152009-01-08T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:51:26.737-08:00Chapter 11 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 11, Part 3 of 3 (p. 266-277).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Arminius finding himself in this manner contending from day to day against the slanders of adversaries, used to complain to himself that he was set down by his brethren as a sort of mere '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">filth and offscourings;</span>' while by those who at this time enjoyed his intimacy, he was heard on several occasions uttering with a groan, and adapting to his own infelicitous lot, these words of the prophet Jeremiah: '<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Woe is me, my mother, that thou hast born me a man of strife, and a man of contention to the whole earth! I have neither lent on usury, nor men have lent to me on usury; yet every one of them doth curse me.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Jer. xv. 10.</span>].<br /><br />Meanwhile, consulting at once for his reputation and for the tranquillity of the church, it pleased the Rulers of Holland to summon Arminius before their Assembly on the 30th of October, and to order him, in fulfilment of the pledge he had lately given, to deliver to them, briefly and perspicuously, orally, and in writing, his own opinion on all the heads of doctrine in reference to which he stood somewhat in doubt. Joyfully obedient to this mandate, on the day appointed he repaired to the Hague, and before that august assembly of the Illustrious Fathers of his country, he expounded, in a lengthened oration, his opinions respecting Divine Predestination, the Grace of God, Free Will, the Perseverance of the Saints, the Certainty of Salvation, the Perfection of Man in this life, the Deity of the Son, Justification, and the Reformation of the Confession and Catechism. The subject, however, on which he deemed it of special importance to insist, was that of Predestination; and therefore, besides fortifying hie own opinion on this point by a variety of reasons, he also asserted, at great length, the magnitude of the difficulties which beset the doctrine that was delivered by many divines of the Reformed Church. He showed and proved that a sentiment was propounded by some which conflicted with the nature of God, and his wisdom, justice, and goodness — with the nature of man and his free will — with the work of creation — with the nature of eternal life and death — and, finally, with the nature of sin; that it was subversive of divine grace, opposed to the glory of God, and obstructive to the salvation of men; that it made God the author of sin, hindered sorrow on account of sin, did away with all pious solicitude, diminished the desire of piety, quenched the ardour of prayer, generated despair, inverted the gospel, impeded the ministry of the divine word, and, in fine, shook the foundations not of the Christian religion only, but of all religion whatsoever [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Declar. Arm. coram Ord.</span>]. After expounding these particulars in a manly tone, and in succinct order, he at length brought his oration to a close in these striking words, so indicative of a mind devoted to the maintenance of Christian peace:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Such, my most noble, most potent, most wise, and most prudent Lords, is what I have thought it dutiful to lay before your Highnesses. At the same time, also, I give thanks to this most noble and potent Assembly (to which, after God, I acknowledge myself bound to render an account of all my actions,) that it has vouchsafed to listen to me with clemency and patience. Still further, I solemnly declare that from my inmost soul I am prepared to enter into friendly and fraternal conference on these and all other points, respecting which any controversy may exist or ever occur, with my reverend brethren, at whatever time, in whatever place, and on whatever occasion shall to this illustrious Assembly seem good. Moreover, I promise to maintain in all these conferences a bearing flexible and fair, prepared alike to learn and to teach. Besides, when, on all the doctrines which may fall to be discussed, it comes to be inquired, in the first place, whether that which is the subject of debate be true, and the next place whether the belief of it ought to be regarded as necessary to salvation, I, for my part, solemnly promise and vow that no article, however I may prove it by the most solid arguments to be agreeable to the Word of God, shall by me be obtruded on my brethren who think differently as a thing to be believed, unless I clearly prove from the Divine Word, and that quite as clearly as I have proved its truth, that it is also necessary to salvation that every Christian should so believe it. If my brethren shall be ready to do the same, it will be no easy matter, in my judgment, for any controversy or schism to exist amongst us. To these things I add — in order that all apprehension, so far as I am concerned, may be removed from this noble convention, now occupied and oppressed with weighty affairs, as those on whom the safety of our country, and of the Reformed Churches, in the highest degree depends — that the errors must needs be very many and grievous which I will not forbear with in my ministerial brethren; for I am not one who would lord it over another's faith, but one who would merely be a servant to those believing, that in them may increase the knowledge of the truth, together with piety, peace, and joy in Jesus Christ our Lord. But if my brethren be of another mind, and think that I ought not to be borne with, and that no place should be allowed to me among them, I nevertheless hope that no division will arise by reason of me, seeing that too many divisions, alas, already abound among Christians, and it becomes every one rather to strive with all his might to get these same diminished and extinguished. But in this event, I will in patience possess my soul; and though it shall still be my aim to live for the good of our common Christianity, as long as the ever-blessed God may be pleased to prolong my life, I will cheerfully resign my office, mindful of this: Sat Ecclesiae, sat Patriae Datum: For the Church, and for my Country, my part has been discharged.</span>'<br /><br />Here ended Arminius. His oration, though listened to with great admiration and applause, from the modesty of the speaker, gave rise nevertheless to a diversity of judgments; some being of opinion that he had spoken nothing but what the exigency of just defence had demanded, while others accused him of over-much confidence, and of having used the sword rather than the shield.<br /><br />At that time, and in the very month in which Arminius had delivered this declaration, in writing, into the hands of the States, the Synod of South Holland, held at Dort, decided that it should forthwith be sternly insisted on, that those pastors who had a leaning to Arminius should disclose whatever scruples or strictures they might have, relative to the Confession and Catechism, within the space of the month following that on which they received intimation, on pain of ecclesiastical censure to be inflicted on the contumacious [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefat. Act. Synod Dordr.—Trigl. Hist. p. 416, 417.</span>]. They further resolved that the same demand 'should in like manner be made of the Professors of Sacred Literature in the Leyden Academy, and of Peter Bertius, the moderator of the Theological College. The affair was pushed with great vehemence at the time, some breaking out very intemperately against those of their brethren who differed from them in opinion; so much so, indeed, that Ruard Acronius, pastor of the church at Schiedam was not afraid to call Francis Lansberg, who was simply striving to direct the counsels of this Assembly towards peace, a sink of dissensions [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Uitenb. Hist. Eccles. p. 446.</span>]. The States, however, apprehensive lest, by this ecclesiastical statute, their own decree to have the above-named writings revised in a National or Provincial Synod, should be eluded, and all but set at nought, gave orders in a letter addressed to the several Classes, dated Nov. 23, that whatever observations any one might have, were to be transmitted to them sealed, and entrusted to their custody against a Provincial Synod. By this step an end was forthwith put, in South Holland at least, to these hasty and ill-timed altercations, about subjecting those writings to a re-examination. Notwithstanding these things, however, the churches of North Holland did not abate one jot of their zeal. For new forms of subscription were coined by them, which every Classis drew up according to its own mind; and that, too, so craftily that neither copy nor form of the subscription was granted, nor the day indicated to him who demanded the day. In other places, also, new tests were proposed, and promises exacted to explain the Catechism as it had been explained in the Church during the time of the Spanish persecution [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Press. Declar. Rem. p. 63.</span>]. And that statutes of this description might not pass for spent thunderbolts, they actually went the length, in the Classis of Alkmaar, of interdicting the pulpit, and a seat in the Classis, to four ministers — Adrian Van Raepherst, Arnold Folkartson, John Evertson Van Velsen, and William Lomannus, who were favourable to Arminius, and refused to subscribe these new formularies:— a stretch of authority of which the supreme magistracy in the first instance had not been made aware, and which they straightway, withal, disapproved and contravened [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Uitenb. Hist. Eccles. p 454.</span>].<br /><br />In addition to all this, the deputies of both Synods further resolved to convey by letter an urgent request to Gomarus that he would come to the aid of the afflicted Church (we may be permitted here to use their own words), and not shrink from assaulting, in open conflict, Arminius himself, who in the public Assembly of the rulers had uttered so many things against the common opinion of the Church. This divine thought that the request was one which ought on no account to be refused; and having previously obtained liberty to speak, on the 12th of December he presented himself before the Assembly of the States of Holland and West Friesland, and delivered himself of a vehement oration against Arminius. He accused him of '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">various heresies and gross errors under which he laboured in reference to the received doctrine concerning the grace of God and the free will of man; concerning the justification of man in the sight of God; concerning the perfection of man in this life; concerning predestination; concerning original sin, and other points connected with the forenamed doctrines; how well in certain things he agreed with the Pelagians and Jesuits, while in others his views were worse and still more corrupt than theirs; what just grounds he had moreover given for the suspicion that he also cherished corrupt opinions concerning the authority of the Sacred Scriptures; concerning the Holy Trinity; concerning the incarnation and satisfaction of Christ; concerning the Church; concerning faith, regeneration, and good works, and other subjects of great importance. By what arts, still further, did he disseminate his opinions! When publicly asked, for example, and adjured by the churches to lay open his doubts, he had nevertheless to that hour concealed his own sentiments, but had diligently inculcated them in private to such pastors as he hoped to be able to gain over to them, as well as to his students; the principal arguments by which the orthodox doctrine is usually built up he set himself to invalidate; but to those of Jesuits, and other adversaries with which they attack the doctrine of the Reformed Churches, he lent his support; he struck into the minds of his disciples a variety of doubts respecting the truth of the received doctrine, and first suspended it, along with the heterodox doctrine, as if in aequilibrio, and then utterly rejected it; after having called the Pope of the Romanists antichrist and an idol, straightway, to please the Jesuits, he further calls him his brother, and a member of that church which is the mother of the faithful; that he shunned the light, — never to this hour having consented to give forth any declaration of his soundness and agreement in doctrine, although very often affectionately and fraternally urged by the churches to do so; that he had laboured hard to prevent his errors, which had been detected before the Supreme Court, from becoming known to the churches; that, spurning the judgment and decrees of Synods, Classes, and Consistories, he had leaped at the first emergency to the tribunal of the Supreme Magistrate, and studied by courtly arts to conciliate favour for himself, but procure hatred for the churches. He (Gomarus) was not insensible how very difficult it was, and how hazardous a task, to encounter those who, while studying innovations, were in blushing honour at the Court, and rejoiced in a courtly trumpeter [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Alluding to Uitenbogaert.</span>] of his innocence and virtue; and that Constantine himself, in olden time, had attached such importance to the eloquence and surreptitious arts of that courtly preacher, Eusebius, as to be influenced by his vote in the Council of Nice to acquit Arius after he had been condemned. Still, however, trusting to the goodness of his cause, he hoped better things of the constancy of the States; and inasmuch as the students of theology in the Leyden Academy, and many pastors up and down, were daily swerving from the orthodox doctrine, strifes and contentions prevailed, the churches were disturbed, and the citizens were split up into parties, he abjured them as speedily as possible to convoke the promised National Synod, in which, after a legitimate investigation into the causes of the evils, an appropriate remedy might at length be applied to the same.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">E Praefat. Act. Synod. Dordr.—Uitenb. Hist. Eccles. p. 455. et seqq.</span>].<br /><br />This is a summary of that oration which was delivered by Gomarus; and by most of the magnates it was regarded as abundantly stinging, containing, as it did, many things that were offensively spoken, and of which Arminius, on more occasions than one, had, by arguments the most solid, cleared himself of all suspicion, — particularly in regard to those things that were advanced respecting the Pope of Rome. For this reason the States resolved that this oration should be kept under the seal of silence, and that no copy of it should be handed to Arminius, lest occasion might be furnished for further alienation of spirit. Nay, on accurately weighing the whole affair, they began to shrink more and more from, the idea of convoking a Synod, and to decline convoking it at this time as useless to the Church and to the country. For they happened to be perplexed by very serious disputes concerning the truce, in which the Grand Pensionary of Holland, Oldenbarneveldt, and the illustrious Commander of the Army and Prefect of Military Affairs, Prince Maurice, were far from being at one. A further obstacle presented itself in the disposition evinced by so many ministers of religion to trample under foot and set at nought the authority of the Supreme Powers in relation to sacred things, assailing with special virulence the primary decree already mentioned, in terms of which it had been agreed that a Synod of the kind contemplated might be held with advantage. Besides, they had reason to fear that the minds of the ecclesiastics were too much exasperated by these very serious discussions respecting matters of faith, to warrant the hope, now that things had reached such a pass, of any remedy being applied by a formal convention of that kind to the contagion that rioted throughout the Church. Nay more, considering that the blasts of contention were increasing in violence, and that in various quarters some, in an attitude of open hostility, were doing their utmost to compass the ejection of their fellow-pastors from the Church, the most of those who sat at the helm of the State thought it very hard indeed to expose to the rage of a few the reputation and worldly prospects of those who had amply approved themselves as citizens most obedient to their mandates; as pastors most acceptable to their churches; and as leaders of the Reformed religion, by no means inactive, even at the time when the destiny of the Low Countries quivered on the point of the sword. When at this time, therefore, the pastors sent by the Classes of Holland importuned them to convoke a Provincial Synod, the rulers, perceiving that they were goaded on by a most inordinate desire for the condemnation of Arminius and his followers, rejected their petition, adding, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that they had no objection to give their sanction to a Synod at any time, provided it would abstain from the rash and precipitate condemnation of brethren, and yield to the wish of the rulers that they would not molest their fellow-pastors on account of these controversies until the matter should be more fully investigated and examined in a National Synod, and an agreement come to by which the churches might regain their common tranquillity and concord.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Resp. ad Epist. Wal. p. 18. 19.</span>]. Reverting to this circumstance at a subsequent period, H. Grotius, that brilliant star and prodigy of the Low Countries, remarked, — and apparently with truth, — that the States had the same reason for dreading the Synod as that which formerly led the very sagacious Philip, Prince of Hesse, when invited to a Synod by Flacius Illyricus and other theologians of Jena, to reply, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that as long as there existed that violence of spirit, and that rage for condemning those who differed from them in opinion, even in the least degree, — a disposition which every day exemplified, — no good could be expected from such conventions.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Grot. pietas Ord. p. 51.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-45971378013903171332009-01-07T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:50:45.483-08:00Chapter 11 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 11, Part 2 of 3 (p. 255-266).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />This being done, and the conference brought to a close, the Council reported to the States of Holland '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that they, indeed, as far as they had been able to perceive from this conference, were of opinion that the controversies which had arisen between these two professors were not after all of such great importance, and had to do for the most part with certain more subtle reasonings on the subject of Predestination, which might either be omitted, or tolerated in a spirit of mutual forbearance.</span>' On this report being made, it pleased the States forthwith to summon before them, in the Council-hall, both the professors, and the rest of the ministers concerned [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.</span>]; when the Most Honourable, the Grand Pensionary (Oldenbarneveldt), addressing himself to them, among other things declared '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that it was to him matter of gratitude to God that on the great heads of Christian doctrine no controversy existed.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Declarat. Arm. coram Ord.</span>]. And then, after having, in name of that honourable assembly, given thanks to each for this renewed and faithful endeavour, he enjoined upon them, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">to keep to themselves what had been transacted in that meeting; to advance nothing whatever that was opposed either to the Sacred Scriptures, or to the Confession and Catechism; and to direct all their counsels henceforward for the peace of the Academy and the Church;</span>' adding, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">that the States would do their endeavour to get these controversies determined either in a National, or (if that could not be convened in time,) in a Provincial Synod.</span>'<br /><br />But Gomarus, thinking that much greater importance ought to be attached to the growing controversies, begged permission to speak, and did not scruple on that occasion to declare, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the opinions of his colleague on the points in dispute between them were of such a nature as would make him shrink, if he himself entertained them, from the thought of standing before God, his judge; and that unless a remedy were promptly applied, it was to be feared that there would be a mutual embroilment of one province against another, church against church, city against city, and burgher against burgher.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Grot. Epist. ad K. Reigersb.—Praefat. Act. Synod.</span>]. While to some these statements seemed unwarrantably harsh, others viewed them as the testimony of an unshackled and fearless conscience, and this the rather, that for several days, and most of all at that time, he had maintained some moderation of look and tone. On the other hand, to this declaration of Gomarus, which he was greatly astonished to hear, Arminius spiritedly rejoined, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he for his part, was by no means conscious of holding any religious sentiment of so atrocious a character; that the controversies were not so serious as all this, but chiefly concerned Predestination; and that he always adhered to the Confession of the Church in Holland, and meant still to adhere to it. That in opposition to the particular opinions of some, he had occasionally spoken, as necessity demanded; but that he had never given utterance to anything that militated against the general sentiments of the Reformed Church. That he would furnish no cause for any schism either in the Church or State. That he was, moreover, prepared to declare openly and in good faith his opinion and his aims in regard to the entire subject of religion as soon as he was commanded by his Sovereign Lords to do so; yea even now, before withdrawing from this hall.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex. Declar. Arm. coram Ord.</span>].<br /><br />Many who were sincerely attached to Arminius, and to the cause of ecclesiastical peace, had anticipated from this conference a happier issue, and threw the blame of the protracted dissension upon Gomarus, who here, if ever, <span style="font-style: italic;">had scorned to yield</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">This is an allusion to the words, 'cedere nescius cuiquam,' which the poet Heinsius applies to Gomarus in certain verses prefixed to the collected works of the latter.</span>]. Yea, and others, too, whose feelings rose against Gomarus in still smarter revolt, did not hesitate to declare, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that they would rather appear before the divine tribunal with the faith of Arminius, than with the charity of Gomarus.</span>' Hugh Grotius, for one, a man of great name, alluding to the above-mentioned conference, writes in a letter to his kinsman Reigersberg, that he had found Uitenbogaert about this time more sad [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">'And Gomarus more jocund,'— adds Gerard Brandt. Hist. Ref. Low Countries.—TR.</span>] than usual — giving vent to these among other expressions: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that although the Provincial Synod should take place, nevertheless, considering the weight of prejudice under which the affair was driven, and that the particular opinions of divines, — stealing insensibly into the minds of their disciples, and by lapse of time, and neglect of profounder inquiry, received with the tacit consent of the churches, — smothered by their authority the ardour of great intellects; and considering that in churches, not less than in other assemblies, the <span style="font-style: italic;">greater </span>could prevail over the <span style="font-style: italic;">better </span>part, he anticipated for the prospects of Arminius no happier issue than befell Castellio, who was so pressed by the violence of his adversaries as to "be reduced to the necessity of seeking a livelihood by labouring as a woodman.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Origo et progress, dissens. Eccles. in Belg. p. 22.—Vid. (Grot. Epist. opus p. 3.</span>].<br /><br />That this was no chimerical fear which haunted the mind of Uitenbogaert in regard to his friend Arminius, might be too well augured from the foul lies and insults with which, more and more every day, detraction assaulted the name of the latter. For this end, there were put in circulation, at this very time, twenty, and eleven, theological articles, ascribed [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">That is, two series of articles consisting respectively of twenty and eleven. See the opening statements of his Apologia adv. art. xxxi., Opera p. 134.—TR.</span>] partly to him, partly to Adrian Borrius, one of the ministers of Leyden, and partly to both; in the dissemination of which his adversaries had this sole object in view, to stir up against these two men, thus branded with the black mark of heresy, the hatred, not only of the unlettered public, but also of those who held high positions both in the Church and in the State. Of these articles, sixteen, couched in the self-same words, had already, two years before, reached the hands of Arminius. These being alike destitute of truth both as respected historical narration and theological import, Arminius thought that they would die in the bud, and might therefore pass unnoticed at the time; but when, contrary to his expectation, he perceived that they were still, and increasingly, in circulation, and were, moreover, augmented by new articles, he judged it expedient, lest the rage of calumny should gather strength from delay, and protracted silence on his part be construed as confession, to meet them with a temperate and succinct reply. The task accomplished, he showed this apologetic treatise to the very persons themselves, (men of wisdom and of great authority) by whose aid he succeeded in laying his hands on the above-named articles; but they dissuaded him from publishing it, lest the too thorough confutation of calumny should so engender ignominy to the authors of it as to influence more and more their zeal in maligning him [Ex Ep. Arm. ad S. Egb. 10. Octob. 1608.]. I cannot allow myself, in this connexion, to omit the striking words, worthy to be held in remembrance, in which, after having explained his own opinion on the articles in detail, he thus replies to a certain principal objection by way of corollary:<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">There will be those, perhaps, who will twit me with appearing to answer at tunes in a tone of hesitation, when it is incumbent on a doctor and professor of theology to be sure of those things which he is to teach to others, and not to fluctuate in his opinions. To such I would answer: 1. That even a man the most learned, and the most versed in the sacred writings, is ignorant of many things, and is always a learner in the school of Christ and the Scriptures. But it is not possible for the man who is ignorant of many things, to give an unhesitating reply on all the points in regard to which an occasion or necessity of pronouncing may be presented to him, either by adversaries, or by others who wish to inquire and ascertain his mind by conversation and discussion, in private or in public. For it is better, on points respecting which he has not certain knowledge, for such a man to pronounce doubtfully rather than positively, and to intimate that he himself requires to make daily progress, and along with those inquirers to seek instruction; for no one, I trow, has advanced to such a stage of boldness as to call himself a master who is ignorant of no one thing, and who entertains a doubt on no subject whatsoever. 2. All things that come under controversy are not of equal importance. Some doctrines are such that no one may doubt concerning them who wishes to be ranged under the name of Christian; but there are others which are not of the same dignity, and in regard to which those who have treated of the Catholic doctrine have differed among themselves without detriment to the Christian truth and peace. Of what description the points are which are here treated, and respecting which I have seemed to give a dubious answer, and whether they are points of absolute necessity, will fall to be considered at the proper time. 3. If this, my reply, is not peremptory, it is not because I have advanced anything in it contrary to my conscience, but because I have not thought proper to bring out, at the first moment, all the things which I could say. I have judged my reply sufficient, and more than sufficient, for those imputations which are grounded on no reasons whatever; neither on this, that they can in truth be fastened on me, nor that they militate against the truth of the Scriptures. In reference to most of them, a simple denial, and demand for proof, would have been a discharge in full of all that they could justly claim at my hands. I have proceeded beyond this, in order to give some measure of satisfaction; and further, to stimulate them to a conference, should my brethren think it needful. This I will never refuse, provided it be proceeded with in due form, and in such a manner that fruit may be expected to result from it.</span>'<br /><br />Meanwhile that calumny which we have mentioned above, as to his strenuous efforts to promote the interests of the Papal kingdom, was also resuscitated about this same time, and was urged against him in a manner the most offensive. With the view of neutralising this falsehood, a year had scarcely elapsed since he had drawn up very learned theses concerning idolatry; adding, by way of corollary, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the Roman Pontiff is an idol, and that those who take him for that which he vaunts himself to be, are, for that very reason, idolaters.</span>' Besides these he had published other theses, in which he maintained '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the Reformed Churches had not made a secession from that of Rome, and that these churches did well in refusing to hold and profess communion with it in faith and divine worship.</span>' Nor was this all. The more effectually even yet to seal the lips of his detractors, Arminius, shortly after the conference held in the presence of the Grand Council, got up a public disputation concerning the Roman Pontiff, maintaining that he is '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">an adulterer, and the pander of the Church, the false prophet and tail of the dragon, the adversary of God and of Christ, the antichrist, the wicked servant who beats his fellow-servants, having no title to the name of bishop, the destroyer and waster of the Church.</span>'<br /><br />Yet not even by this declaration did he succeed in satisfying the suspicious tempers of some. An individual was found who, in a letter he sent to Germany, put in a mutilated form the title of his theses respecting secession from the Church of Rome, by which foreigners, and those who were unacquainted with the facts, might be led to believe that Arminius had an undue leaning to the Papal Church. Yea, a certain minister of Amsterdam, carried away by the popular clamour against him, made a public assault upon Arminius as a divine who was most unsound, and who held the Roman Pontiff to be a member of the body of Christ— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">a doctrine this,</span>' he exclaimed, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">so exceedingly hateful to God, that it had been observed by discerning men not a few, that from the time at which certain persons had begun to maintain it, public affairs had declined, and some of our most strongly fortified cities had come to be occupied by the enemy.</span>' This calumny was followed up by another, namely, that he was instigating many to go over to the Papacy, and furnishing occasion to some politicians to deny less stoutly the exercise of the Popish religion to those who demanded it.<br /><br />But though Arminius saw no remedy for dissipating these clouds of detraction to be preferable to that of innocence and patience, still he lost no time in addressing to wise and eminent men, and in particular to the magistrates of Amsterdam, in whose city at that time the most unbridled rage of evil-speaking prevailed, his complaint of the injury thereby inflicted upon him; and he protested by letter how utterly these clamours were at variance with truth. Mark his brief declaration on this subject in a letter to the honourable Sebastian Egberts:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I openly profess that I do not hold the Roman Pontiff to be a member of Christ's body, but to be an enemy, a traitor, sacrilegious, a blasphemer, a tyrant, and most violent usurper of a most unjust domination over the Church; as the man of sin, as the son of perdition, as that most notorious outlaw, &c. I understand, however, by the Pope one who exercises the Pontificate in the usual manner. But if some Adrian of Utrecht, supposing him to be elevated without dishonourable artifices to the Pontifical chair, were actively to set about the reformation of the Church, making a commencement with himself the Pope, and with the Pontificate, and with the Court at Rome, and assuming nothing more than the name and authority of Bishop, — though holding the pre-eminence over all other bishops, by virtue of ancient statutes of the Church, — him I should not dare to call by the above appellations; for the man whom the minions of Antichristianism, and whom the Court at Rome hold in such hatred as to take his very life, such a one I cannot persuade myself to regard as the worst of men. Now it is believed that this man was dispatched by poison, administered by those who feared that he was about to effect a reformation in the Church, and in the Roman Court. I apprehend, however — and I think it can be established out of the Scriptures with great probability — that from him who is elevated to the Roman Pontificate, no reformation is to be expected; and if any one allows himself to be moved by that hope to make the attempt, he incurs the certain danger of death or of exile — the issue being so arranged even by God himself: for the Pontificate will be abolished by the glorious advent of Christ, and the predicted reformation is destined to take place through the separation of peoples from Babylon, which Babylon, at the time, will not be destitute of its head. But if that preacher supposes that from this opinion which I entertain, — namely, that a bill of divorcement has not yet been delivered by God to the church in which the Roman Pontiff sits enthroned, — it follows that I acknowledge even the Pope himself to be a member of the church, he blazons his own ignorance of the distinction between those who are seduced, and suffer the tyranny, on the one hand, and the False Prophet and tyrant himself on the other, who himself abnegates the name, member of the church, seeing he audaciously pronounces himself head of the church, and excommunicates all those, or holds them as excommunicated, who are not prepared to acknowledge him as head.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. p. 212.</span>].<br /><br />Feeling persuaded that by this answer he had abundantly refuted the forementioned accusation, Arminius reckoned it a matter of no great difficulty to reply to those who at the same time affirmed of him that he had pronounced '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">the fourth volume of Bellarmin to be irrefutable.</span>' It is indeed true that though he had never employed these very words, he yet confessed that he sometimes cherished the wish that he could have seen more solidly refuted the arguments of that celebrated champion of the Romish Church, in which he strove to elicit from the opinion of certain of the Reformed, that they made the ever-blessed God the author of all sin. Nay, even the celebrated Conrad Vortius himself, who, on account of the strenuous service he rendered against the Papists, had at this time earned a high reputation, failed, in the judgment of Arminius, to do sufficient justice to the cause of the Reformed in his reply to the '<span style="color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Theses of the Jesuits concerning the faith of the Calvinists.</span>' For this reason, he deemed it the safer course to decline the authority of certain divines of the Protestant Church, and openly to declare that peculiar opinions ought not to be fastened upon the Reformed Churches; and moreover, that it might be retorted on Bellarmin that there were some also among the scholastics, and other popish divines, from whose writings the selfsame consequences might be deduced [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. ep. Arm. ad C. Vorst. 25. Aug. 1607. item. Ep. prid. Kal. April 1609.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-6447593640632848572009-01-06T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:49:43.814-08:00Chapter 11 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 11, Part 1 of 3 (p. 243-255).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER XI.<br /><br />CONFERENCE AT THE HAGUE IN MAY 1608: ARMINIUS REPLIES TO THIRTY-ONE DEFAMATORY ARTICLES, FALSELY ASCRIBED TO HIM AND ADRIAN BORRIUS. —A.D. 1608.<br /><br />Rightly judging, however, that private complaints, like the foregoing, among his confidential friends served no end of self-protection, and that unfavourable reports respecting him and Uitenbogaert were notoriously increasing every day; considering how little, moreover, he could calculate, as matters then stood, on obtaining satisfaction through the medium of the ordinary ecclesiastical assemblies; Arminius decided on pursuing another course. He and Uitenbogaert, accordingly, presented a petition to the States of Holland, in which '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">they not only complained that by their discrepant judgments as to the holding of the Synod, they had incurred, without cause, the odium of many; but further declared, that though they regarded the judgments in question as being at once in strict harmony with reason and Scripture, and in the highest degree adapted to the present state of ecclesiastical affairs, they by no means wished to press them to the obstruction of a National Synod; nay, rather, they would cheerfully suffer that Synod — so long earnestly desired, and which they themselves, too, thought necessary — to be held in any other way, provided that in it due regard were had to the sacred Scriptures, and care taken that no one lord it over another's faith. For their part, they utterly disclaimed all desire to bring about a new state of things, and with God's help would adhere till their last breath to the Reformed Church and doctrine. Further, they humbly begged and implored the illustrious States that by their gracious influence with the States-General a National Synod might be at length convoked, and an end be put at once and for ever to these most grievous contentions.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. scriptum hoc supplic. integrum in Hist. Uitenbog. p. 425.</span>].<br /><br />But further, as he perceived that, owing to the public and grave deliberations of the States respecting the armistice, little attention was paid to this petition on its being presented and read; and as, in the meantime, his students were treated in a most rigorous manner, and the usual Academic certificates with which he furnished them were unfairly disparaged, Arminius felt constrained to draw up an additional petition, in his own individual name, most urgently praying these supreme rulers of his country that they would not refuse to institute a legal inquiry into his cause, and, with that wisdom by which they were distinguished, determine the method, either in the form of a conference, or of an ecclesiastical convention to be held under their auspices, by which, on the very first opportunity, the way might be opened to him to clear himself from so many injurious aspersions [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Uitenb. Hist. Eccles. p. 435.</span>]. Reverting to this petition, the Rulers of Holland and West Friesland, with the view of foreclosing a greater evil, determined that Gomarus and Arminius be summoned to the Hague — the four ministers who attended the last conference at the Hague, from South and North Holland, to be also present; and that they be heard before the Grand Council. The Honourable Councillors of the Supreme Court, moreover, were instructed to ascertain, by means of the conference on religious matters to be held between the two Professors, — due inquiry being instituted into the cause of each — '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">whether the difference that subsisted between them could not be settled by friendly converse; and to report to the States in regard to the whole case.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Trigland Hist. p. 413, 414.</span>].<br /><br />But to this decree the deputies of the churches opposed themselves with all their might; and pleading prescriptive authority, they, on the 14th May, besought the States that in place of this conference, appointed to be held before the Supreme Court, a provincial Synod be convened, in which this ecclesiastical cause should be investigated and decided by ecclesiastical men, and by those delegated by the churches with power to judge. The States replied that it was only an inquiry into the cause with which the Supreme Court was charged; but that judgment respecting it would be afterwards committed to a provincial or National Synod [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Praefat. Act. Synod. Dordr.</span>].<br /><br />To give however, a more accurate idea of what, at this time, were the state and aspect of the Leyden Academy, we will here present to the reader the letter (if the eminent Peter Bertius, Regent of the Theological College, written, on occasion of the appointment of this conference, to that Honourable Senator of the Supreme Court, and most upright man — Rombout Hoogerbeets:<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Illustrious Sir, and Honoured Lord: I understand that a conference is to be held shortly, on some controverted heads of doctrine, between Doctor Gomarus and Doctor Arminius; and that, for the settlement of that affair, besides the ministers already appointed, there are to be present most of the senators of your Superior Court. I hope the matter will be brought to a happy and successful issue, for the restoration of Ecclesiastical concord; and I sincerely pray and supplicate God, the author of peace, that such will be the result. For hitherto a diversity of conflicting sentiments, besides distracting the minds of some, has also made my office, sufficiently difficult in itself, to be one of much more difficult fulfilment. For at first, instructions were given us that my students should listen to either professor indifferently, and without distinction. I also, by virtue of my office, am instant and urgent to this effect; nor do I suffer any one to neglect any prelection with impunity. I also rehearse the prelections of either, without prejudice in regard to any; and partiality, according to the measure in which I execrate it, do I also banish it from the college. By this it happens, that of my students some embrace the sentiments of Doctor Gomarus, some again, those of Doctor Arminius — though modestly, in the latter case, on account of the authority of the Synod, and the hazard of being kept back from the ministry. But I find from the statements of certain parties, that all those who attend Doctor Arminius are found fault with, and held as suspected, and are judged unfit either for churches or schools. For which reason, the illustrious States will lose their cost, and myself, the students, and Arminius, will lose our pains; and it will turn out that what they have learned from him they must unlearn, and recant the sentiments they received with open minds. If this is to take place, it were better either that the students had never dipped into learning, or that Doctor Arminius had never been seen here, where he advances things that cannot be brought to the public, except under the infamous brand of heresy. But I, willingly obedient to the mandates of my Lords, and desirous of promoting the interests of my students, could wish the toil of Arminius, not less than of Doctor Gomarus, to be useful to the churches. I am hedged up, therefore, with difficulty on either hand, and hang in doubt as to what, in the circumstances, ought to be done. And having in the college, at present, several young men ripe for the church, I very much wish, both for their sake, and for the sake of those who come after, and for my own sake also, and, more than all, for the sake of the public peace, that whatever difference there is, may be authoritatively settled and set at rest; for that all the controversies should subside, and either party succumb to the opinion of the other, I suppose is matter of a too moderate desire to be realised in men of that profession. Such being the state of affairs, I could wish that, to me also, in that transaction at the Hague, some place were allowed in the back benches, as a listener and spectator. Not that I desire to pry curiously into other people's affairs, or to address myself to business which it devolves on others to perform (for I have enough, and more than enough, to do at home,) but that, for the reason mentioned, I reckon that affair one which very much concerns me. For on me mainly, as presiding over the youth engaged in the study of theology, will it devolve to carry into effect what may there be decreed; and I shall be in a condition, after hearing parties, to discharge more prudently the functions of my calling and superintendence, and to consult accordingly for the interests of my students. I shall have the course indicated at last which I myself may venture openly to pursue. For I perceive that the eyes of many are turned on me, and that from my procedure, judgments are formed respecting my young men; and that, too, so keenly, that even now I am asked whether there are not some in the college who are attached to the opinion and party of Arminius; which students, unless they recant, these persons (you know their hot-headed zeal) would gladly see cashiered and turned out forthwith. There are some also who urge that they ought to be severally scrutinized and examined by some deputed for that purpose; and if, during that process, any one should express aught that savours of the sentiments of Arminius, — if they do not answer in all things according to the opinions of their inquisitors, — the only alternative for my young men will be, either to bring themselves to a recantation, or to betake themselves to another mode of life. Thus, so long as we are miserably split up into parties, we are in course of being reduced, by little and little, to desolation; and our body which, by the concord and equanimity of the professors, was in a condition to stand firm and increase, is sensibly dissolving and wasting away, — the very parties inflicting the evil who ought to apply a balm to the grievous wound. I beseech you, therefore, illustrious sir, that you would use your influence with the noble Barneveldt, to procure me admission into that conference, to act merely a silent part, and get to know of the things that would make for the advantage and safety of the college. I will see you, God-willing, in the course of two days, and ascertain from yourself personally either what you have done in this matter, or what you think respecting it. — Farewell. Given at Leyden in Holland, 14th May, 1608. Thine, Peter Bertius.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex ipso Bertii autographo.</span>].<br /><br />Thus writes Bertius. Whether or not he got his wish, or what sort of answer he received from the honourable Hoogerbeets, I have never ascertained.<br /><br />Meanwhile the two professors, with the deputies of the churches, presented themselves, on the day appointed, before the august body of Senators at the Hague; when the honourable president of the assembly, after some preliminary refereace to the mandate of the States, and the object contemplated by this transaction, called on Gomarus to declare, without evasion and reserve, whether there was any difference between him and his colleague, and if so, what was its nature. Gomarus urged by way of objection, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he was sincerely devoted to the service of the illustrious States, and acknowledged that this present College of the Supreme Court was composed of distinguished and prudent men; but that it was their province to pronounce judgment not concerning sacred things, but only concerning things civil and secular. That the matter belonged not to their tribunal, but to that of the churches; and that no investigation of it could be instituted in this place without prejudice to his cause, and that of the churches. That they ought to render unto God the things that are God's, but unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and that they ought to obey God rather than man.</span>'<br /><br />The Council replied, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that no doubt the cause of religion was here treated of, and that they by no means wished to arrogate to themselves the authority to decide in regard to it, — an inquiry into it being the only province intrusted to them. Again, accordingly, they importuned Gomarus that he would not refuse to communicate to them freely his own account of the matter.</span>'<br /><br />Still spinning out delays, Gomarus here contended, in the first place, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that it was unjust that he should undertake the part of prosecutor of Arminius, with whom he had hitherto lived on familiar terms; being, moreover, ignorant of the things which his colleague had written or had delivered, whether in public prelections or in his private class. But since Arminius had sometimes made mention of certain scruples he had, it was better that he should produce them himself. He, for his part, did not call in question any heads whatsoever of Christian doctrine as they were comprised and explained in the Confession and Catechism; nor did he wish to stir any strife respecting them.' At last when the Council insisted on a more express reply, he was reduced to the alternative of confessing 'that between himself and Arminius there did lurk some dissension; but that, in his view, it was highly inexpedient and prejudicial to the liberty of the churches to explain the nature of it at this time and in this place.</span>'<br /><br />At this point, however, Arminius, who had thus far maintained silence, expressed '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">his astonishment, considering that various rumours about his heterodoxy had by this time run the round of all the churches, and the conflagration he had kindled was said to have surmounted the topmost pile of the Church, that such prodigious difficulty should nevertheless be here pretended to declare of what sort that difference might be, or what he himself had taught in opposition to the formularies of consent. It was iniquitous to demand this declaration from him, and thus fish matter of accusation out of his own mouth. What he had taught privately or publicly in contrariety to the Confession and Catechism, no one would ever produce. And as to the doubts he might cherish, it was not fair that he should produce them, except in terms of a decree of the supreme Magistracy, who had determined that the Confession and Catechism should be revised in a National Synod.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Praefat. Act. Synod. Dordr.</span>].<br /><br />On this, Gomarus undertook to prove, that in regard to that primary article of the Christian faith, the justification of man before God, Arminius had taught such an opinion as was repugnant to the sacred Volume and to the Confession of the Belgic Churches. In proof of this he produced the very words of Arminius, extracted both from his theses on justification, and from a certain letter to a friend, in which he had asserted, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that in the justification of man before God the righteousness of Christ is not imputed for righteousness, but faith itself; or the act of believing constitutes, through God's gracious act of acquittance, that righteousness of ours by which we are justified.</span>' After Gomarus had asked that these statements might be inserted among the records of that conference, Arminius, on the other hand, dictated the following statement for insertion in the same records:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">In order to declare how utterly abhorent my soul is from all desire of unnecessary contention or disputation, I profess that I hold as true, pious, and sacred, that doctrine of justification before God effected through faith to faith, or of the imputation of faith for righteousness, which is contained in the Harmony of Confessions by all the Churches, and that I approve of it, and have always approved of it, and thoroughly acquiesce in it. But that a still clearer testimony may remain of this my desire for the general peace of the Reformed and Protestant Churches, I solemnly affirm that should occasion require me to commit to writing my opinion on this matter, both as respects the point itself, and as respects the phraseology and more accurate mode of treatment (which opinion I am prepared to defend by solid arguments, against all objections), I will cheerfully submit that writing to the verdict of all these Churches, to this extent, namely — that if, after the cause has been investigated in due form, according to the decree of my supreme Lords, these Churches shall think that said opinion and its maintainers are not to be tolerated, I will either desist from that opinion, in the event of being better instructed, or resign my office.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. lib. cui titulus Origo et progress, dissidiorum Eccles. in Belgio, Belg. conscript. p. 21, 22.</span>].<br /><br />In these statements of Arminius Gomarus still refused to acquiesce; nor could he be brought to acknowledge that, on the point in question, the opinion of Arminius was exactly coincident with that of the Reformed Church; on which the latter, with the view of testifying still further the pacific sentiments that inspired him, and of avoiding superfluous disputation, exclaimed, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Here is my confession on this point, couched in the express terms of the Palatine Catechism.</span>' Then, reciting the very words of the Catechism, he went on to say: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I believe in my heart, and confess with my mouth, that I shall pass as righteous in the sight of God, only by faith in Jesus Christ, so that, although my conscience may accuse me of having grievously sinned against all the commandments of God, and not kept any of them, and of having till now, besides, been inclined to all evil, nevertheless, provided I embrace these benefits with true confidence of mind, the perfect satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ will, without any merit on my part, of the mere mercy of God, be imputed to, and bestowed upon me, the same as if I had committed no sin, and as if no taint adhered to me — nay more, as if I myself had perfectly performed that obedience which Christ has performed on my behalf. Not that I please God by the worth of my faith, but that the satisfaction, righteousness, and holiness of Christ constitute my righteousness in the sight of God. Only, I cannot embrace it, and apply it to myself, in any other way than by faith.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. resp. ad quest. LX. et LXI. Catech. Palatinae.</span>].<br /><br />But not even this confession would satisfy Gomarus. Nay he repeatedly rated Arminius for making faith the object or matter of justification, but the righteousness of Christ the meritorious cause of justification. In this he thought he had effected something of great moment; but in the estimation of most of the Council it was little else than a logomachy, since it was evident between them both that it was not the value of our works, but the grace of God, that effected our being justified by faith [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Grot. Epist. ad Reigersb.</span>]. When, moreover, Gomarus insisted on hearing the opinion of Arminius on certain other questions also, it seemed good to the Council to enjoin first on him, and then on Arminius, to deliver each his own opinion respecting certain primary articles on which some question had been raised between them, comprised in a series of propositions, and drawn up in writing, and that each, in turn, should append his own animadversions and strictures on the written statement of the other.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-57536459596516154512009-01-05T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:54:09.277-08:00Chapter 10 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 10, Part 3 of 3 (p. 231-242).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Still further material and occasion for these dissensions were famished by a little book published in the course of that year (1607) at Gouda, intended for the religious instruction of youth, and afterwards known under the name of the Gouda Catechism. This little work was composed by the pastors of the Church in Gouda for the purpose of testing whether it could be turned by the authorities to the use of the elementary schools, and substituted in the place of the Palatine Catechism, which, in their judgment, contained questions too difficult, and couched in ambiguous terms [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Fusius de hoc libello Uitenb. in Hist. Eccles.</span>].<br /><br />No sooner had that composition seen the light than very diverse opinions began to be expressed in regard to it. Those who sided with Arminius praised the little work, partly because its authors, treading in the steps of the Palatine divines in respect to its general order, seemed to have advanced nothing whatever repugnant to the Christian doctrine; partly also, and on this account mainly, that the composition referred to, foreclosing all scope for the introduction of thorny and disputable points, and breathing the primeval simplicity of Christianity, embraced in few words, and these, too, deduced from the Sacred page, the things to be believed.<br /><br />But immediately some arose from among the opposite ranks who publicly condemned and execrated the book, and declared that there scarcely ever was a monstrous opinion but what was veiled in terms as general as itself was horrid; that simplicity suited primitive times, when evils as yet unknown required no antidote, but that afterwards as errors increased forms of words had to be devised which might ferret out errorists from their lurking-places; that this little book either did away with, or omitted, the primary doctrines of the Christian faith; that a signal was thereby given to those desirous of innovation; and that Servetus himself would have cheerfully subscribed it [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Grot. Annual, p. 555. in fol.—Vid. S. Lubberti Epist. ad Oldenbarneveld. inter Epist. Eccles. p. 215.</span>].<br /><br />Thus what the former called in harmony with heavenly truth, the latter called the lurking-place of heresies; what the former called liberty, the latter called disorder.<br /><br />Nor was this all. Against this little book Reyner Donteklok took occasion to brandish his pen; and in a published treatise he not only addressed himself to the confutation of this small work of the Gouda divines, but also, at the instigation of certain malevolent parties, traduced with sufficient virulence those who had thought differently from others as to the mode of holding the Synod; and moreover, in no oblique terms, and all but pointing at him with his finger, he insinuated that Arminius had a hand in drawing up this catechism. But although to the publication of it Arminius had no great objection, and afterwards owned that the Gouda ministers had consulted him prior to issuing it, and that, after they had explained the reasons why they thought it should be published, he had expressed his concurrence; nevertheless, to that composition he never applied a hand, nor had any share in the drawing of it up. Nay more; so far as his choice, and that of some others, was concerned, this little book would have lain long enough unnoticed, had not the intemperate clamours of many magnified it into an importance greater than was due [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Examen Catech. Goud. a R. Donteklok, Belgice conscript. 1607. pag. 3. 5. 8. 9.10—Arm. Epist. ad C. Vorst, Kal. April. 1609.</span>].<br /><br />Calumny, however, overstepping even these limits, and spurning all restraints of humanity, put in circulation, at this same time, a most foul report concerning Arminius and Uitenbogaert, namely — that the Roman Pontiff, in a most gracious letter which he wrote to them, and holding out the hope of a large emolument, had commended to them the advocacy of the Church of Rome [Ex Epist. Artopaei Uitenb. Histor. Eccles. inserta.]. How very far this was from even the semblance of truth, will yet more clearly appear from the subsequent thread of our narrative. But this magnificent lie was accompanied by another which was put in circulation about the same time, namely, that Arminius was in the habit of commending to his students, as of prime importance, the writings not only of Castellio and of Coornhert, but also of Suarez and other Jesuits, and of speaking in contemptuous terms of the works of Calvin, Beza, Martyr, Zanchius, Ursinus, and other eminent divines of the Reformed Church [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.</span>].<br /><br />These, and many more calumnies of the same kind, which were scattered far and wide regarding him throughout Germany, France, England, and Savoy, Arminius received with no other emotion than that of pity for brethren who sinned so grievously against God and their neighbour. Nay, he thought as he himself testifies, that by this prodigious ado, and by the preposterous diligence of brethren, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">it would only turn out that he, a poor obscure man, who was not able by his own virtues to push himself into notice, and of whom otherwise scarcely any out of Holland would either know anything, or deign to speak, would day by day be rendered notable and renowned.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm. ad Drus.</span>].<br /><br />How inconsistent with truth that allegation was, as to his having recommended writers of questionable note (which was reported, as elsewhere, so in particular at Amsterdam,) I prefer to state in his own words rather than in mine. Mark these expressions of his which he penned to the chief magistrate of Amsterdam (Sebastian Egberts): '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">The rumour about my advising the students to read the works of the Jesuits and of Coornhert, I can call by no other name than a lie; for never to any one, either by request or spontaneously, have I uttered a word on that subject. So far from this, after the reading of Scripture, which I strenuously inculcate, and more than any other (as the whole Academy, yea the conscience of my colleagues will testify,) I recommend that the Commentaries of Calvin be read, whom I extol in higher terms than Helmichius himself, as he owned to me, ever did. For I affirm that in the interpretation of the Scriptures Calvin is incomparable, and that his Commentaries are more to be valued than anything that is handed down to us in the <span style="font-style: italic;">Bibliotheca </span>of the Fathers; so much so, that I concede to him a certain spirit of prophecy (interpretation) in which he stands distinguished above others, above most, yea above all. His <span style="font-style: italic;">Institutes</span>, so far as respects <span style="font-style: italic;">Commonplaces</span>, I give out to be read after the Catechism, as a more extended explanation. But here I add — with <span style="font-style: italic;">discrimination</span>; as the writings of all men ought to be read. Of this my mode of advice I could produce innumerable witnesses: they cannot produce as much as one whom I advised to study Coornhert and the followers of Loyola. Let them produce one, and the lie will stand revealed. So that here from nothing springs a history, or rather a fiction. What other things are there done I know; aye, and what busy things have been done elsewhere I think you do not know. If you did know, you would be astonished at the perverse effrontery of men. As an antidote to all these I oppose integrity and patience, and sustain myself with the hope of a happy exit which the just Judge will grant unto me, who knows what I seek and what I do. I know that my earnest aims are pleasing to him, as being solely devoted to the establishment among Christians of truth, piety, and peace.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Arm. Epist. ad Seb. Egb. inter Ep. Eccles. p. 185.</span>].<br /><br />With no less confidence of mind did he undertake, in the year following (1608) the vindication of his own cause in the presence of that most noble man, Hippolytus a Collibus, the ambassador to the States of the United Provinces of the illustrious Prince Palatine, Frederick the Fourth. Humours being already rife at Heidelberg that, on several articles of the Christian faith, Arminius dissented from the received opinion, this nobleman, thinking he ought not to rest in these, but hear the other side also, invited Arminius, in a very courteous manner, to visit him at the Hague. Admitted, accordingly, to an interview with him, Hippolytus, in a manner singularly courteous, stated the reasons for the sinister suspicions respecting him, and on what heads it was that Sybrandus Lubberti had impeached him by letter to the distinguished Paraeus; on all which Arminius candidly and ingenuously explained his own opinions, in particular, concerning the Divinity of the Son of God, concerning Providence and Divine Predestination, concerning Grace and Free Will, and also on the subject of Justification. So satisfactory to that nobleman was his explanation on these points, that he thought fit earnestly to solicit Arminius to give it to him in writing, in order that, on the one hand, after due consideration of these points, he might judge with more certainty and decisiveness respecting them, and on the other, be in a condition, in conferring with any on the subject, to confute the calumnies referred to, and to vindicate his innocence. Arminius accordingly drew up at the time, (on the 5th April 1608,) that most erudite and elaborate epistle to the ambassador of the Prince Palatine, which still exists among his published works, and comprises a succinct defence of his doctrine, as well as of his life. It is with pleasure we here subjoin the golden words with which he closes this epistle — words every way worthy of a noble-minded man:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Would to God,</span>' he writes, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that I could obtain this from my brethren by profession of the same religious fellowship with me in the Lord, that they would at least give me credit for some susceptibility of conscience towards God! — which, surely, the love of Christ ought readily to obtain from them, if indeed they would meditate on his spirit and mind. What profit can accrue to me from dissension undertaken from the mere lust of dissension, from stirring schism in the Church of Christ of which, by the grace of God and of Christ, I profess myself a member? If they imagine I am instigated to this by ambition or avarice, I declare sincerely in the Lord they do not know me. So free from avarice can I affirm myself to be, that it has never happened to allure me with its blandishments, although pretexts are not wanting by which I might palliate or excuse it. Ambition I have none, except the honourable ambition which impels me to this — to investigate divine truth from the sacred Scriptures with all my might — to hold it forth when found, calmly and without contention, so as not to dictate to any, or strive to extort assent, much less to seek to lord it over another's faith; and to hold it forth for this end, that I may gain more souls to Christ, and that I may be a good savour to him, and that mine may be an approved name in the church of the saints. This, after a long time's patience, I hope through grace to attain; although at present I am a reproach to my brethren; an offscouring and outcast to those who, in the same faith with me, worship and invoke the one God, the Father, the one Lord Jesus Christ, in the one Spirit, and who cherish the one hope with me, of obtaining the heavenly inheritance through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Lord will grant me, I hope, (and O! that the light of that holy and happy day may smile upon me!) that we may peacefully, in the name of the Lord, meet among ourselves, and institute a Christian conference on things pertaining to religion: in which I promise through the grace of God to exhibit that moderation of spirit, and love for the truth and peace, which may fairly be exacted and expected of the servant of Christ. Meanwhile, let my brethren be quiet and allow me to be quiet; — as quiet indeed I am, giving no trouble or molestation to them. If they think otherwise of me, let them institute proceedings; I will not shrink from the authority of any competent tribunal; I will not fail to appear. If they are of opinion that the minds of those who listen to me are artfully pre-occupied as from a distance, and the affair managed with such policy that they neither deem it advisable to face me in judgment, nor think it sufficiently safe that studious youth should be intrusted to me; and that therefore a black mark, as what I have deserved, ought to be daubed upon my name in order that these same youth may be scared away — otherwise certain risk would be incurred from the delay of the conference; lo, here I present myself, that along with them I may address, solicit, and supplicate those whose prerogative it is to call, or grant, conventions of this kind, that they would not suffer us any longer to be agitated by such vexation and disquietude of spirit, but either themselves apply a very speedy remedy, or permit it to be applied — but still, by their decree, and under their direction. I will not refuse to appear before any convention, whether of all the ministers of our United Netherlands or of some of them, to be summoned from the several provinces; or even of all the ministers of Holland and Westfriesland, (to which province our Leyden Academy belongs) or of some to be nominated from their number, provided the whole affair be transacted under the cognizance of our rightful rulers; nay further, I neither shrink from, nor dread the presence of learned men to be summoned from other places, provided they take part in the conference on equitable terms, and subject to the same rules to which I myself shall have to submit. Permit me to say, in one word, let a convention be held, be it of many or of few, if it only present some glimmering hope of success — such a hope as I shall not be able, on solid grounds, to prove deceptive — here I am, prepared and ready at this very day, at this very hour; for it teases and vexes me to be daubed every day with fresh calumnious aspersions, and to have the annoying necessity imposed upon me of wiping them away. In this respect, surely, I little resemble heretics, who either shrink from ecclesiastical conventions, or shape matters so, that they can trust to the number of their adherents, and calculate on certain victory.</span>'<br /><br />On the day following that on which Arminius drew up this epistle — or rather epistolary dissertation on religious affairs — to the Palatine ambassador, he gave forth the same indications of an intrepid and upright spirit in a letter to that man of consummate integrity, already knit to him for many years, at once by the bonds of close intimacy and of high esteem — John Drusius. After some preliminary reference to the very shameful acts of calumny of which he was the victim, and to the calmness of spirit by which he eluded them, he goes on to address that most attached friend in the following terms:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">This very peace of conscience makes me judge that even the advices of my friends, by which they urge me to refute these calumnies, need not be acted on by me with precipitate haste. Nor do I apprehend that the minds either of the rulers, or of learned men, will be so far preoccupied with prejudice against me as not to be easily disabused even by the mere explanation of my sentiments and aims. Nay verily, such mighty and over-hasty plotting on the part of my brethren against me, is to me a most certain sign that they are distrustful of their own cause. For he that trusteth doth not make haste, confiding in Jehovah, in whom alone is all his help; and mine truly lies in his Word only, for the truth, perfection, and perspicuity of which alone I will not cease to contend against the traditions of all men, of what rank soever they be, as long as the benignant God thinks fit to lengthen out my life; nor will I ever suffer to be imposed on the Church of Christ, whether under the name of secondary, or under any other name, any authoritative rule whatsoever other than that one only Rule which is contained in the books of the Old and New Testament. And there is a necessity, I perceive, for a strenuous agitation of the subject, even among us who not go long ago were foremost to urge this first principle in opposition to Papists; but now, as if fleeing from court, we do not blush to prescribe to the churches and to their ministers, as traditions by the standard of which the Scriptures are to be explained, even Confessions and Catechisms, because, forsooth, they were drawn up by learned men, sanctioned by various decisions, confirmed by length of time (for they are beginning to plead a prescription of forty years), and sealed with the blood of martyrs!</span>'Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-13016800436312009932009-01-04T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:53:45.359-08:00Chapter 10 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 10, Part 2 of 3 (p. 220-231).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Before taking leave of this ecclesiastical Convention, I must by no means here omit to state that a certain sinister rumour concerning Arminius, occasioned by the holding of this conference, spread out far and wide, to the effect that he had been entreated, with the utmost importunity, by the brethren then assembled, that he would not hesitate to unfold freely those things which he had meditated in the matter of the Christian faith, with the promise that they would do their endeavour to get him fully satisfied; but that this he had in a tone of sufficient boldness refused [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dord—Baudart. monum. Hist</span>]. As this story stirred against him a very bad feeling in the minds of many, who thought that he ought to have paid greater honour to that Conference, convened as it was from all the provinces at once, we think it well to trace from a point a little further back the character of this whole affair, and the transaction as it really happened, according to the account given by Arminius himself.<br /><br />Sometime, then, before the subject of our memoir, agreeably to the summons of the States-General to attend the Conference, had presented himself at the Hague, he happened accidentally to lay his hand on five articles, viz: <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">concerning Predestination, the Fall of Adam, Free Will, Original Sin, and the Eternal Salvation of Infants</span>. These had been sent into other provinces also, but especially into Zealand and the district of Utrecht: yea and had been discussed at some ecclesiastical meetings, in terms which implied that, on those heads of doctrine, they contained the sentiments of Arminius himself. But scarcely had he perused them, when he immediately felt assured he had detected their author, — one, namely of the number of those whom the rulers had summoned to that same Conference with himself. Deeming it proper to deal with him on the subject at that very time, he freely signified to him on what grounds he suspected that those articles had been drawn up by him. This imputation the individual referred to did not deny, but declared that they were by no means sent as importing that they contained the opinions of Arminius himself, but simply as articles which furnished matter for disputation among the students at Leyden. Arminius rejoined that by this circumstance, notwithstanding, serious injury was done to him and to his reputation; nor could it otherwise than happen that articles of this kind, everywhere in circulation, would be attributed not so much to the students, as to himself; when the truth was, that they had neither emanated from him, nor did they accord with his sentiments on the points concerned, nor with the Sacred Scriptures.<br /><br />After these things had passed between them (two only of the other brethren being present), Arminius further judged it proper, towards the close of this convention at the Hague, when all were present, to introduce the matter, especially as some were present at this convention who had not only read those articles, but who were under the impression that they were the production of Arminius himself. Accordingly, when the proceedings of this assembly had been already signed, — nay, after certain had been deputed to report their transactions to their Mightinesses the States, — he begged the brethren to do him the favour to remain for a little on his account, as there was a matter on which he wished to have some conversation with them. He straightway produced the above-named articles, and having read them, he proceeded in strong terms to complain of the injury done to him by their circulation — adding, that he protested solemnly, and as in the presence of the Supreme Majesty, that these articles were by no means his, nor did they express his opinions. This he repeated twice, and moreover entreated his brethren that they would not attach such immediate faith to rumours set afloat respecting him, and be so ready to admit things which were falsely laid to his charge. To this, a member of the conference on his own account replied, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that for that end he would do well to signify to his brethren what in these articles he approved, and what he rejected, that thus they might to some extent be made aware of his opinions;</span>' and some other one followed in the same strain. Arminius, however, replied that this did not appear to him to be advisable, nor was it obligatory upon him, seeing that this conference had been appointed for no such end; not to mention that time sufficient had been expended on this assembly, and that the States themselves were expecting their reply. On saying this, the conference was straightway brought to a close, no one seeking to follow up the conversation any further, nor all assembled simultaneously agreeing in that request, or using any persuasion with him, to understake such a task. Nay more, after the conference was over, some of the brethren declared in the presence of Arminius himself, that they had been charged by their churches not to enter on any discussion concerning doctrinal controversies, and should anything of the sort happen, to quit the conference as soon as possible [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Arm. Delcar. coram Ord.</span>]<br /><br />But further, after the holding of this convention, calumny heaped fresh charges on Arminius and on those who, sharing in his opinion, had freely spoken their minds as to the proper way in which the Synod should be held. They were represented as having sought, by these dissentient counsels, to interpose fresh delay in the way of the Synod's being held, and to pave the course directly for bringing about a revolution in doctrinal sentiment. Some made them out to be guilty of having got inserted in the public decree, the condition concerning the revisal of the Confession and Catechism. More roughly handled than all, were Arminius and Uitenbogaert, whose names, and whose very free expression of sentiment, according to the license granted to them by the States, were most acrimoniously animadverted on by the Synod of North Holland, which met shortly after at Amsterdam [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Trigland. Hist Eccles.—Uitenb. Hist.</span>] Nay, as if all this were not enough, Sybrandus, Lubberti, a professor in the Franeker University, despatched letters to Scotland, Germany, and France, asking advice of these foreigners, which contained a coloured and garbled account of what had been transacted at the previous Convention; — thereby exerting himself to preoccupy their minds with a violent prejudice against Arminius and Uitenbogaert [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid literas S. Lubberti huic fini scriptas inter Epist. Eccles. p. 187.</span>]. To this document the accused party felt constrained, in course of time, to oppose another, to vindicate among these foreigners the innoence of their good name against the detractions of adversaries [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Epist. Arm. et Uitenb. Sybrandianae oppos. inter Ep. Eccles. p. 190.</span>].<br /><br />The Synod of South Holland, too, held at Delft in September following, embarked in the same business with sufficient animosity. Some of its proceedings, as far as the scope of the present narrative may require, I will here briefly and summarily recount. At this Synod, then, Uitenbogaert was called upon to explain to its assembled members the reasons why, in giving advice as to the mode of holding the National Synod, he, along with Arminius, had thought and counselled differently from the other pastors; in order that the Synod, after giving them due consideration, might be able to judge whether thereby, also, any prejudice had been done to the church. But Uitenbogaert immediately replied, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he, for his part, was ready to communicate to the Synod the opinions which had been delivered to the States; but to render reasons for them in this place, when those who had given expression to the same opinions with him were neither present, nor consulted, appeared to him altogether unadvisable. Moreover, he and his association in that Convention, were by no means bound by the mandate of any particular Synod, but had been summoned by the States of Holland themselves, to bring out their opinions freely and according to the dictate of conscience: to the States, therefore, with the best right, must the reasons of these opinions be rendered. It was to no purpose, accordingly, and quite out of place, for this assembly to take upon itself to judge in respect to that matter; rather ought the brethren to take care, and strive by all means, to prevent such very hasty judgments, — which also tended to the most serious prejudice of the Supreme Authority, — from compromising the interests of the churches; and to take care that such proceedings to not interpose fresh obstacles to obtaining the Synod, so long desired.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.—Uitenb. Hist.</span>]. Various discussions ensued concerning this affair; as also, on the same occasion, concerning the right of the magistrate in things pertaining to religion. At last the Synod thought that it would be sufficient in the circumstances, if the opinions presented to the States were merely read to it, and full judgment in regard to them deferred until the arguments for the dissentients' opinions, yet to be delivered to the States, should be more clearly made known to them.<br /><br />The affair being thus disposed of, the assembly forthwith decided, in terms of the decree of the last Synod held at Gorcum, to press the inquiry, if some animadversions on the Confession and Catechism had not been presented to the classes. It was replied by some of the classical deputies, that most of the ministers in their respective classes had declared that they had no remarks to make in opposition to these writings; and that in their judgment they were sound throughout, and in harmony with the Sacred Volume — nay, even, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that they were prepared to live and die with the Confession and Catechism.</span>' On the other hand, Uitenbogaert and others, in name of their respective classes, intimated that there were amongst them those who were as yet seriously engaged in the examination demanded, and that they would deliver their animadversions at the proper time [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Press declar. Contrarem. oppos. p. 32</span>]. Immediately snatching occasion from this to get proceedings originated against Uitenbogaert, the president of the Synod asked him whether he, too, cherished any scruples against these books? on which, lest he should appear to call in question any main points of the Christian doctrine, yea, and of the Reformed Confession [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">This noble-minded man, as the elder Brandt informs us, gave the president distinctly to understand, that he answered his question ex gratia, and not at all as being under obligation to do so; and that he declared the question to be 'unseasonable, unprofitable, and a kind of inquisition.' See Ger. Brandt's Hist. Reform. in Low Countries, Vol ii. p. 43—TR</span>], Uitenbogaert spontaneously and candidly declared '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he approved of the Confession and Catechism as far as concerned the substance and basis of doctrine; he held that the fundamentals of salvation were sufficiently contained in them; and these formularies, as far as they agreed with the Harmony [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">See Confessionum Fidei Harmonia Orthod. et Ref. Eccl. &c. Genevae 1581.—TR.</span>] of the other Protestant Churches, had his entire assent.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Uitenb. Hist. Eccles.—Press. declare. Remonst. p. 32. Respons. ad Epist. Wallach. p. 17.</span>].<br /><br />Many joined in this sentiment, and expressed their concurrence in his statements, being desirous of nothing more than that ecclesiastical affairs should be conducted calmly and peaceably until the National Synod. To the suspicious minds of some, however, this declaration was by no means satisfactory; but they further asked '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">if whatsoever things were contained in the Confession and Catechism were, as respects substance, words, phrases, and whatever else of that description, believed to be conformable to the Divine mind or not?</span>' To this Uitenbogaert and the others replied '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that a declaration of that sort could not be made in a moment, and that to settle this matter aright a reasonable space of time was requisite;</span>' on which the Synod at length decided by a plurality of votes to charge all the ministers, and even the professors of theology, that, laying aside all subterfuges, tergiversations, and delays, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">they would attentively examine every thing contained in the above-named writings, both as regards substance, and as regards words and phrases; and each deliver to his own classis, as speedily as possible, whatever remarks he might have to offer in opposition to the received doctrine.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Act. Synod. Delf. Art. 3.</span>].<br /><br />Nor was this all. Proceeding yet further, the Synod, under the pretext that dissensions were growing daily and demanded an immediate remedy, at the same time decreed '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">That their High Mightinesses the States of Holland and West Friesland, be requested to grant it permission to convoke from the two Synods of South and North Holland one Provincial Synod, by which the professors of theology who were to be cited, and such of the ministers of religion as it may seem necessary to the Church to summon, should, on the first opportunity, be brought together to a friendly conference on all those heads of doctrine in regard to which they cherished doubt; that in this way a judgment might be formed by the churches as to the nature and magnitude of the controversies, and as suitable a remedy as possible devised for allaying dissensions and preserving integrity of doctrine.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Act. Synod. Delf. Art. 4.</span>]. But this decision and decree, as it mightily pleased many, so it very highly offended others, and exposed its framers and authors to the suspicion of stepping, under the guise of holding this assembly and conference, into the place of a National Synod, and of exerting themselves to forestall its judgment and sentence. Nay, some thought that by this same decree the act of the States in regard to the lawful revision of the Confession and Catechism, and their right and authority to summon a National Synod in their own name, were very seriously infringed; and that this was done with the sole intent that those whom this ecclesiastical tribunal, after hearing their reasons, might have accused of heterodoxy, should henceforth be held disqualified to enjoy the right of voting in the National Synod. This undoubtedly entered into the grounds on which the deputies of both Synods, who petitioned the States for leave to carry their decisions into effect, were balked of their wish. For, on the 14th September, they received the reply '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that, considering the many difficulties with which this matter was beset, and the very grave political business which distracted the States at the time, it was impossible for them, in present circumstances, to comply with the request of the churches; but at their own tune, and when opportunity offered, they would take the matter into consideration: they further instructed the deputies of the churches to exert themselves meanwhile to the utmost for the promotion of ecclesiastical tranquillity; and they would besides, see to it that ministers of the opposite sentiment should be admonished of the same duty.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Trigland. Hist. Eccles. p. 413.</span>].<br /><br />In the meantime, Arminius and Uitenbogaert were warned on all sides of the grievous extent to which, both in Holland and in the adjacent regions, they were everywhere maligned, — partly by clandestine whispers, partly by reports openly circulated among the people, — on account of the opinions they had expressed as to how the Synod should be held. They judged it by no means their duty to sit silent under all this; on the contrary, as a satisfaction due to their own character, they (on the 6th September) delivered to the Grand Pensionary of Holland, for presentation to the States, their reasons for their opinion, and for the advice they gave, drawn up in writing, and signed also by the two delegates from Utrecht. They moreover declared, that of nothing were they more desirous than that the rest of the brethren also should produce their reasons for the different opinions they advanced; and that thus, in regard to this matter, and the holding of the Synod, their High Mightinesses could give such a decision as would be most conducive to the good of the Church [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Videsis integrum hoc Scriptum in Hist. Uitenbog.</span>]. To the attainment of this wish, however, an obstacle was presented by the public deliberations respecting the armistice, the discussion of which so engaged the States as to leave them scarcely any leisure for these ecclesiastical affairs [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">The deliberations here referred to were of the very gravest character, and proved the source of that alienation between the ambitious Prince Maurice and the incorruptible Oldenbarneveldt, which caused the latter ere long to lose his head. Maurice was opposed to the truce. Oldenharneveldt, knowing his ulterior designs against the new-born liberties of Holland, promoted it in the face of storms that thickened around him from every side. His resolute patriotism at length triumphed in the famous truce of twelve years concluded with Spain in 1609, on terms deeply humiliating to the haughty Spaniard and advantageous to the Dutch—the fame of whose counsels and arms resounded throughout Europe. See Davies's Hist. Holland, vol. ii. p. 432.—TR.</span>]. It was in allusion to this that the illustrious Philip Mornay declared at the time '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he very much wished that an armistice could be concluded, in respect to the growing contentions in the Leyden Academy; for, as the times were, nothing could fall out more unseasonable than these.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">In Epist. ad F. Aerssenium, inter Epist. Eccles.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-9048576835057219642009-01-03T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-16T12:52:54.135-08:00Chapter 10 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 10, Part 1 of 3 (p. 212-220).</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER X.<br /><br />CONVENTION AT THE HAGUE TO ARRANGE THE PRELIMINARIES OF A NATIONAL SYNOD; MISREPRESENTATION OF ARMINIUS AND HIS ADHERENTS FOR THE OPINIONS THEY THERE EXPRESSED; HIS LETTERS TO DRUSIUS AND HYPPOLITUS A COLLIBUS. A.D. 1607, 1608.<br /><br />Having given these things some brief and incidental notice, let us now proceed to trace further the state of the agitated Church, and the progress of the hostile feeling of which Arminius was the object. Towards the close, then, of the month of February, the deputies of the Synods of South and North Holland had presented a petition to the States-General, in which they asked permission of them to hold an ecclesiastical convention for the purpose of paving the way to a National Synod. Leave was granted, and the 22nd day of May was appointed for this convention. Preintimation having been given by the States-General, to the States of the several provinces, these, each in their own name, summoned to the Hague certain pastors and doctors of more distinguished note, to obtain their opinions and advice as to the form and mode in which the Synod should be held.<br /><br />Accordingly, on the day signified by the States General, the following presented themselves at the Hague. From Guelderland, John Leo and Fontanus; from Holland, Doctors Gomarus and Arminius, together with John Becius, Uitenbogaert, Helmichius and Hermann Gerhards; from Zealand, Hermann Faukelius and Henry Brandius; from the province of Utrecht, Everard Boot, and Henry Jansen the younger; from Friesland, Sybrandus Lubberti and John Bogermann, from Overyssel, Thomas Goswinus; and by and by, also, from the city of Groningen and from Amelandt, John Acronius and J. Nicasius. To these the illustrious States immediately submitted in writing eight questions relating to the proper order and mode in which the Synod should be held, with the request that after due consideration they would hand in their opinions, also in writing, and that too, if possible, with one consent; but that, failing this, each should draw out his own opinions apart. In the discussion and examination of these questions (which Uitenbogaert, in his Ecclesiastical History, has narrated at large) several days were consumed in the Presbytery Hall, at the Hague. After a variety of debates on one side and the other, it was at last unanimously agreed and declared, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that, in regard to the time, it was necessary that the Synod should be convoked as nearly as possible at the beginning of the following summer, in the year 1608. With respect to the <span style="font-style: italic;">place</span>, that the most convenient locality for holding the Synod would be the city of Utrecht. With respect to the <span style="font-style: italic;">mode</span>, that the <span style="font-style: italic;">gravamina </span>to be treated of in the Synod be reported by the several Provincial Synods to the National one; that for each particular Synod four pastors, with two elders, be deputed by vote; but that men distinguished for erudition, theological attainment, and piety, might be deputed in place of elders, although not invested with ecclesiastical office; that to this Synod there should be invited not only the churches in the United Provinces that speak the two languages, (Dutch and French,) but those also of the Dutch nation which are dispersed beyond the Dutch confines, or are congregated for themselves under the cross of persecution elsewhere; that their high mightinesses, the States-General, be humbly requested to send to the contemplated Synod delegates of their own, professing the Reformed religion, who might be willing, in their name, to take cognisance of its order; that professors of theology be also called to that Synod; and that in addition to those who are to be delegated by the churches, it be allowable for other ministers to be present at this Synod, in accordance with the usual practice in particular Synods.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Via. praefat. Act. Dord. Synod—Uitenb. Hist. p. 349.</span>].<br /><br />But while on these and some other points there was unanimous consent, on certain other questions, on which the hinge of the matter turned, there was a conflict of opinion.<br /><br />First, a debate was stirred respecting the judge of controversies on points of doctrine: that is to say, whether it should be the prerogative of the few ministers deputed by the churches to determine doctrinal controversies by a peremptory decision; or whether, prior to that decision by which all the ministers (if they wish to retain their office) should be bound to stand or fall, the deputing ministers also should not be informed, heard, and their votes, too, asked respecting the point in debate. For the former opinion, declared the greater part of the brethren; but for the latter, Arminius and Uitenbogaert, and with them the deputies from the province of Utrecht, — maintaining, as they did, that by the name Synod ought to be understood, not those delegated only, but also, and much more, the parties delegating [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Via. Epist. Eccles. p. 193.</span>].<br /><br />A <span style="font-style: italic;">second </span>point of difference concerned the rule according to which it was right that the determination should be made. This was occasioned by the sixth question, proposed by the States, viz., '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Whether it was not right that those to be delegated to the Synod should be bound to express their own opinion freely, and not be held to anything, save the Divine Word alone?</span>' To this question, Arminius, and those who adhered to him, directly answered, <span style="font-style: italic;">it is right</span>. But in this reply the other brethren by no means acquiesced. For although they did not venture to deny that the Divine Word was the test of doctrinal controversies, still, suspecting I know not what snake to lurk under that question of the States, before hazarding their own reply to it, they stirred a further question with Arminius and the others, namely, whether the arbiters of controversy should reckon themselves so bound to the Word of God as not to be at liberty to appeal, at the same time, to the Confession of the Belgic churches? To which, in name of his party, Arminius replied, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he, for his part, acknowledged and received the Confession as a formula of consent, but not as a rule of faith; so that if it, or any part or particle of it, should chance to come upon the anvil of discussion, no regard whatever ought to be had to it, while subjected to this trial, but the judgment respecting it, too, ought to be drawn from the Word of God alone. Nay more, judges of this description, that they may be able to pronounce sentence with the more freedom, ought to be released entirely, during that judicial process, from the subscription by which they had once bound themselves; — but with this express stipulation and caution, that meanwhile, throughout the course of such investigation and trial, it be allowable for no one in the Church or Academy to advance anything, in public or private, which may contravene the Confession.</span>'<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Thirdly</span>, and finally, with reference to the question which the States had couched in these general terms, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">What further may it be expedient to do in regard to the convocation of a National Synod, that the most salutary results may thence accrue to the Church?</span>' The most of the brethren were of opinion that the Belgic Confession and Catechism might be revised, indeed, in the Synod, if the Synod itself, for just reasons, deemed this necessary; but that the States be requested to strike out of their circular of citation, for the sake of the tranquillity of the churches, that clause <span style="font-style: italic;">concerning revision</span>, which seemed to give offence to some, and a license of innovating to others; and that these, or some such words, be substituted in its place: That a Synod be convened for the confirmation, harmonious reception, and propagation of the pure and orthodox doctrine; for preserving and establishing the peace and good order of the Church; and, in fine, for promoting true piety among the inhabitants of these realms.<br /><br />In defence of this opinion many reasons were advanced which, when others tried to repel, adducing several arguments to the contrary, on the ground of which it appeared to them that no alteration whatever ought to be made in the circular referred to, by and by the question began to be mooted and discussed <span style="font-style: italic;">concerning the necessity of revision itself</span>; — Arminius, Uitenbogaert, and the two Utrecht ministers maintaining the affirmative, while the rest thought that this should be left for the Synod itself to determine. The greater part exclaimed, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the doctrine of the Reformed Church, sanctioned by the support of so many most weighty men, and sealed with the blood of so many thousands of martyrs, would, by an investigation of this sort, be called in doubt, and that this would give rise, not only to tumults, and stumblings, yea, and shipwreck of consciences, within the Church, but also to calumnies and reproaches beyond its pale.</span>' To these reasons, moreover, they added certain offensive eulogiums of the books, the revision of which they were discussing, which came little short of a superseding of the Sacred Scripture. Gomarus declared '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he received the Word of God, indeed, as the primary rule of faith, but the Confession and Catechism for the secondary rule.</span>' In this statement, J. Bogermann, minister of the church at Leeuwarden, also expressed his concurrence, and did not hesitate, on the same occasion, repeatedly to declare '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the Sacred Scriptures ought to be interpreted according to the Confession and Catechism.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. lib. cuititulus, Orig. et Progress. Ecclesiastic. Dissid. in Belg. Belgice script. p. 19.</span>]. How completely these words (to be attributed to undue heat of debate, and not approved of by all his own party) tore up the basis of the entire Reformation, aud ran foul of the seventh article of the Belgic Confession itself, was enough, and more than enough, demonstrated by Arminius and his friends. They further strenuously contended for the revisal decided upon by the States; urging on a variety of grounds how accordant this was to reason, and how necessary, moreover, as matters then stood.<br /><br />Arminius, in particular, maintained this position, and vigorously defended it against the objections of brethren. '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">For as to what was advanced about the danger of doctrine being called into doubt, this,</span>' he contended, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">was in the highest degree offensive; seeing that the thing to be discussed was not the Sacred text, but a human composition, which contained errors, and might therefore justly and properly be tried by the touch-stone of heavenly truth. It was to no purpose to obtrude the authority of divines and martyrs. For, besides that it was possible for even them also to have erred, a distinction must be maintained between the different things which the Confession of the Belgic churches contains. For some things are to be referred to the foundation of faith and of salvation, but other things are reared on that foundation, and therefore, of themselves, are not indispensably necessary to eternal life. The former, it is true, had been approved by the unanimous consent of all the Reformers, and confirmed by the martyrs' blood; but not by any means the latter: nay, in regard to these controversies, at present in agitation, no one of the martyrs probably was ever asked his opinion. The fear, too, that disturbances would perhaps arise from the revisal referred to, was one to which divines truly Reformed ought to attach no great importance. For, this reason admitted, it was then with the best right that the Papists formerly left no stone unturned with the view of preventing the doctrine received in the Church for so many centuries back, from being called into doubt, and subjected to fresh examination. Nay more, if Luther, Zwingle, and the other leaders of the Reformed Church, had attributed so much weight to considerations like these, they would never have addressed themselves to a work of such great difficulty, and so full of danger, as the Reformation, and to the serious investigation of the Popish doctrine.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide sis has rationes fusius postea ab Arminio deductas in Declar. sua coram Ord.</span>]<br /><br />The matter having thus been fully argued on both sides, the great majority of the Convention persisted not the less in harping every now and then on that one string, namely, the offence which they declared there was reason to apprehend from the insertion of the fore-named clause in the letters of citation, till at last Arminius, and those who adhered to him, desirous of gratifying the rest, and more solicitous about the thing itself, than the formality, as they called it, gave their consent to the omission of the clause, only that this should be done without implying the omission of the revisal itself.<br /><br />These deliberations being ended, and all results collected, a document was drawn up, and signed by the hands of all, embodying both the opinions in which they agreed, and the opinions in which they differed, which was presented on the first of June to the assembly of the States: appended was a declaration, on the part of all, that they were ready at the will and command of their High Mightinesses to explain more at large their opinions briefly exhibited in that document, and to fortify them with the reasons on which they respectively depended.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-65018830525971553022009-01-02T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-04T14:07:19.951-08:00Chapter 9 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 9, Part 3 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Meanwhile, and shortly before these things were (with very special reference to Arminius and his followers), determined upon by the Synod of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Gorcum</span>, the following circumstance furnished a handle for stirring fresh strife against him. It happened ill the course of a disputation held under his presidency, on the subject of <span style="font-style: italic;">the divinity of the Son</span>, in which he had undertaken to defend what was at once the general and the orthodox opinion on this <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">pre</span>-eminently important doctrine of the Christian faith, that some one of the students urged, in opposition to the theses he had exposed to public scrutiny, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">the Son of God was <span style="font-style: italic;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">autotheos</span></span>, and therefore had his essence from himself, and not from the Father.</span>' Arminius replied that the word <span style="font-style: italic;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">autotheos</span> </span>was not contained in the sacred volume; still, considering that it had been employed by <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Epiphanius</span> and others, of the ancient as well as modern orthodox divines, it was not to be utterly rejected, provided only it were rightly understood. But according to its etymology it might be taken in a twofold sense, to denote either one who is <span style="font-style: italic;">truly God</span>, or such a one as is <span style="font-style: italic;">God of himself</span>. According to the former signification, it could be admitted; but taken in the latter sense, it stood opposed to the sacred volume, and to orthodox antiquity.<br /><br />On the other hand, however, the student tenaciously held to his point; boldly asserting that according to the second signification <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">pre</span>-eminently the term in question was applicable to the Son of God; and that the essence of the Father could not, except improperly, be said to be communicated to the Son and to the Holy Spirit; but that rightly and properly could it be said that the essence of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit was common. This position, too, he maintained with the more confidence and spirit that he had as an authority for his opinion the celebrated <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Trelcatius</span>; for in his <span style="font-style: italic;">Common-places</span>, lately published, he had expounded to the same effect his sentiments respecting the Sacred Trinity. Wherefore, Arminius, deeming it his duty not to leave the truth <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">unvindicated</span>, by virtue of the authority of the office with which he had been invested, spiritedly rejoined, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">The opinion thus advanced was one altogether new and unheard of in the ancient Greek as well as Latin Church. The ancients had always maintained that the Son had his deity from the Father by eternal generation. The opinion now advanced laboured under most serious difficulties. From it there followed not only <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">Sabellianism</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Sabellius</span>, who lived about the middle of the third century, denied all distinction of persons in the Trinity, allowing only a distinction of modes and manifestations.—TR.</span>], the Son being made to occupy the place of the Father, as having his essence from none; but it further followed that the way was thereby paved to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">Tritheism</span>, and that there were just as many Gods held as there were collateral persons supposed. The Unity in Trinity of the Deity had been maintained by the ancient divines of the Church against anti-<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">Trinitarians</span>, solely on the ground of origin, and of order according to origin. On the contrary, to have deity from himself was repugnant to the definition of son; and that no relation could be involved in any thing which was contrary to the definition of that thing.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">Vide</span> sis <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">fusius</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">de</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">hoc</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">negotio</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">disserentem</span> Armin. in <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">declar</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">sua</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">coram</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">Ord</span>. Item Arm. Resp. ad 31. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">Artic</span>.</span>]<br /><br />Thus far reasoned Arminius, who, by the production of these and other arguments of the same kind, flattered himself that he was defending the Catholic opinion on this question, and consulting best for the glory both of the Father and of the Son. Nay, more; he had stirred this affair with the greater confidence that he had rather persuaded himself of the entire concurrence with him on this point of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">Gomarus</span>, who, not long after the publication of the <span style="font-style: italic;">Common-places</span> of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">Trelcatius</span>, had, in a public disputation, impugned his forms of expression respecting the Sacred Trinity, and further refuted his opinion in his own private class. Nevertheless, this very disputation of Arminius furnished fresh occasion and material for the unjust suspicions which malevolent parties entertained concerning him; and the rumour everywhere spread that he entertained erroneous views respecting the Sacred Trinity and the Divinity of the Son. But this he accounted his peculiar infelicity; and he lamented that prejudice should prevail to such an extent that, if any discussion arose, forthwith the entire blame was heaped upon him, even when asserting the views most thoroughly received; while those, on the other hand, were excused and commended who had furnished occasion of strife by their novel and most extravagant modes of expression. To him this appeared nothing less than monstrous; nor did there seem to exist any ground on which, in consequence of the above-named disputation, he could justly and reasonably be suspected of hatching aught that was heretical. So far from this, he testifies (in one of his letters, dated 1st September, 1606) that he had taught nothing whatever on the doctrine in question but what rested on the authority of the Sacred Scriptures, and of the ancient as well as modern divines; and, moreover, that on this point there was nothing which he wished corrected in the opinion received by the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands. Nay more; in this matter he could adduce as on his side the guide and teacher of his youth, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25">Beza</span>; who, in his preface to the Dialogues of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26">Athanasius</span> concerning the Trinity, makes an excuse for Calvin for not having observed with sufficient accuracy the distinction between these two statements: <span style="font-style: italic;">the Son is by himself (per <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">se</span>) and the Son is from himself (a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28">se</span>)</span>.<br /><br />Much about the same time the subject of our memoir was subjected to a calumny not unlike the one we have just narrated. It arose from the following circumstance:— In a public disputation <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">On the person of the Son</span>, in the course of which he very learnedly showed how the economy of our salvation was administered by the Father through the Son and the Holy Spirit, Arminius made the admonitory remark that strict regard ought to be paid to that order which is everywhere observed in the Holy Scriptures; and that it ought to be distinctly considered what proper parts in that economy are ascribed to the Father, what to the Son, and what to the Holy Ghost. The spirit of detraction, besides, had gathered boldness from the fact that several passages of the Old and New Testaments usually cited in support of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29">consubstantial</span> or co-essential Trinity had more than once been explained by him as having another reference. But he trusted that it would be no difficult matter to persuade all who were capable of forming a candid judgment, that from such data nothing could with any semblance of truth be inferred that was really at variance with the Christian faith. For in regard to the first of these occasions of calumniating him [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30">Vid</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_31">epist</span>. Arm. ad <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_32">Hyppol</span>. a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_33">Collib</span>.</span>], he deemed it a vain handle, seeing that to all who had learned from the Sacred Word that the Father had in the Son reconciled the world to himself, and was administering through the Holy Spirit the word of reconciliation, it could not fail to be super-abundantly evident that, in the scheme of human salvation, an order must be discerned among the persons of the Trinity, and care taken not to confound the parts severally attributed to them, — unless any one chooses to step into the heresy of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_34">Patripassionists</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Those who denied all distinction between the persons of the Trinity, were called <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_35">Patripassiptoi</span> (<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_36">Patripassionists</span>) in the west, and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_37">Sabilliatoi</span> (<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_38">Sabellians</span>) in the east.' <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_39">Hagenbach's</span> Hist. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_40">Doct</span>. Vol. I. p. 245—<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_41">Edinb</span>. 1846.—TR.</span>]. Nor, on the other hand, did he think that greater pains were called for in refutation of what was objected to him about explaining somewhat differently a few passages of Holy Writ. For even if in this respect he had sinned, there stood convicted of the same crime Calvin himself, who, in this direction, had used great freedom, if ever man had, and yet had been defended by the celebrated <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_42">Paraeus</span> against the treatise of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_43">Hunnius</span> entitled <span style="font-style: italic;">Calvin </span>a <span style="font-style: italic;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_44">Judaizer</span></span>. But what the opinion of Arminius was on the sacred Trinity, and how unfairly some accused him about that period of Arianism, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_45">Socinianism</span>, and other crimes of the same description, the candid reader may judge for himself from his very scholarly theses on this article of the Christian Faith. The aim and method, moreover, which, in the treatment of this subject, he proposed to himself, he (in his reply to the 31 articles) declares in the following terms:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Of those who know me, the most part know with how great fear and how anxious a. conscience I handle that sublime doctrine of a Trinity of Persons. How little, in explaining this article, I delight, either in inventing for myself, or in adopting as already invented by others, novel modes of expression, unknown to Scripture and orthodox antiquity, my entire method of teaching demonstrates. How cheerfully I even bear with those who speak differently, provided the meaning they intend be just, my hearers are prepared to testify.</span>' Still further, with the view of dissipating entirely all suspicion of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_46">Socinianism</span>, he openly declared in the course of that period (in s letter dated 1st September 1606), that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">so far was he from being obnoxious to this charge, that he rather cherished the hope, if the Synod would only lend him a willing ear, of being able to contribute certain arguments which made for the more effectual confutation of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_47">Samosetans</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Or Anti <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_48">Trinitarians</span>. Paul of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_49">Samoseta</span> held views similar to those of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_50">Sabellius</span>, and lived about the same period.—TR.</span>], or at least for the more easy liquidation of their objections and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_51">reasonings</span>.</span>' Nay more, Arminius, as his disciple John <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_52">Narsius</span> testifies, subjected, not long after, certain of the leading and most celebrated doctrines of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_53">Socinus</span>, but particularly his book <span style="font-style: italic;">concerning the Saviour</span>, to public and formal 'refutation, and that so vigorously, so elaborately, so solidly, that probably no one before or after him, ever did so with more effect [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_54">Vid</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_55">Narsii</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_56">Epist</span>. ad J. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_57">Sandium</span> x. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_58">sept</span>. 1612 script. inter <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_59">Epist</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_60">Eccles</span>. p. 327.</span>].<br /><br />But, dismissing these things, let us now revert to the delegates of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_61">Gorcum</span> Synod, and to the part they played with Arminius and his colleagues. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_62">Uitenbogaert</span>, then, having returned from the camp at <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_63">Wesel</span>, the four men appointed to this business proceeded to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_64">Leyden</span> in the month of December, and having read in due form the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_65">Synodal</span> decree to each of the professors, they courteously asked them to comply with the petition of the Church. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_66">Gomarus</span> was the first on whom they waited: he expressed his thanks for the pains expended on this business, and lavished the highest <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_67">laudations</span> on the Synod for having consulted for the tranquillity of the churches and for the maintenance of pure doctrine. But he declared that he felt reluctant to give any full or definite reply to the principal head of the Synod's demand, until he had taken counsel on this business with his colleagues; and therefore it seemed to him advisable that through their Dean (Arminius) the Theological Faculty ought to be convened. The answer of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_68">Trelcatius</span> was to the same effect. On the other hand, the delegates rejoined, that to summon the Faculty just named appeared to them, to be altogether unnecessary; and pressed them for a further reply. At length, having given them time for deliberation, they next waited on Arminius, who, after hearing their petition, with great confidence replied, that he '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">gave thanks to the eternal God for having suggested to the assembled brethren a decree of this description, — so thoroughly salutary and Christian. He had for his part hitherto given himself, and would still give himself, with all diligence, to the investigation of the Confession and Catechism of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_69">Belgic</span> churches, as to a duty to which he acknowledged himself bound not only in the name of God, but also, at this time more particularly, by the requirement of this illustrious assembly. Further, as to handing in animadversions, if he had any such, he would at the fit time deliberate and do what the occasion and the state of affairs would permit.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_70">Uitenb</span>. Hist.</span>]. On receiving this answer, the delegates next told Arminius the suggestion of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_71">Gomarus</span> about convening the Theological Faculty, and asked his mind on this matter. Arminius then inquired '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">if the Synod wished them to examine the above-named documents together, and at once, in full college assembled, and to signify to the Synod their opinion respecting them in name of the entire Faculty; or if, on the other hand, they wished each of the Professors to submit his opinion and observations singly and apart?</span>' To this the delegates replied, that their impression was that the latter and not the former was the wish of the Synod; on which Arminius straightway rejoined '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that there was no propriety in calling the entire Faculty together about a business the charge of expediting which had been committed by the Synod to each of them apart.</span>' Accordingly, the others, his colleagues, not deeming it expedient to give further trouble, at length intimated, both of them, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that they would not fail to pay all respect to the petition of their brethren, and would subject to a renewed examination those <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_72">formularies</span> of consent, — not as if they cherished any doubt concerning any article contained in them, but solely on the principle of complying with the mandate of the Synod.</span>' At last they began to treat with the regents also of both colleges— Peter <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_73">Bertius</span>, and Daniel <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_74">Colonius</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_75">Bertius</span> was the Regent of the Dutch, and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_76">Colonius</span> of the Walloon (or French) College.—TR.</span>]. The former briefly replied '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he would yield compliance with the Synod's decree to the best of his ability.</span>' The other, however, declared, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he would follow the decision decreed — or yet to be decreed — by the Walloon Synod.</span>'<br /><br />In the meantime the rumour of these growing contentions in the Netherlands reached the ears also of foreigners, including men of great name. Nor were there wanting those in France, England, and other countries, who expressed their solicitude for the peace of the Church in Holland. Deserving of special mention on this account is that illustrious light of France and champion of the Reformed cause, Philip De <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_77">Mornay</span>, Lord of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_78">Plessis</span>, a man most zealous, if ever man was, for the interests of Christianity and the promotion of peace. This shows itself in a brief letter written by that most distinguished man to the very learned <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_79">Tilenus</span>, on the first of January, 1607, into which, also, he introduces a reference to Arminius himself in the following terms, which we translate from the French:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">As for Doctor Arminius, I have certainly heard men the most noble and honoured pronounce his praise in the highest and most cordial terms. Doctor <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_80">Buzenvallius</span> has promised to furnish me with that treatise a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_81">compend</span> of which you have presented in your letter. Would to God that each of us may contain himself within the bounds of Scripture, and not travel beyond it, that we may be able with combined energy to assault the idolatry, superstition, and tyranny of Rome. Let us, at all events, bear with one another in these profound mysteries, in which there is always room to learn, and doubtless also to take exception, expound them with as scrupulous circumspection as you may. Opinions of this sort, accordingly, I maintain with moderation and sobriety; and I hold that those who propound them, if they only proceed in their investigation of them according to the rule of our religion, ought to be treated with prudence and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_82">lenity</span>.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_83">Vid</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_84">Epist</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_85">Eccles</span>. p. 179. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_86">Ep</span>. xcvii.</span>]. Thus far writes the most noble Lord of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_87">Plessis</span>. Had his counsels, so singularly pacific, been only complied with at that time, it would certainly have fared better at a subsequent period with the Church and Academy of Holland.<br /><br />But at this critical conjuncture, when most of all Arminius stood in need of the counsel of friends, he sustained, early in the spring, a severe calamity in the much lamented and premature decease of John <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_88">Halsberg</span>, one of the ministers of Amsterdam, whom for many years he had loved most ardently, and as if he had been a brother. How heavily at the time this trial pressed upon his spirits, the following words will show:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I had previously, indeed (writes Arminius, 3d May, 1607), received intelligence of the illness of John <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_89">Halsberg</span>, that most eminent brother in Christ, and faithful friend; but the vigour of his nature, and the season of the year, led me to cherish the hope of his recovery, which made me the less anxious on his account; If, however, I could on any ground have foreboded that he was so suddenly to depart from this life, I should not have omitted to render him the last personal offices of Christian regard. But this God has not granted me, — a circumstance which, over and above the grief I justly feel for the death of that most affectionate man, affects my mind in no small degree. But justly do you remark that <span style="font-style: italic;">he has gone before</span>: we shall every one of us follow, each in his own order, — the thought of which is constantly impressed upon my mind by a catarrh which now assails me at no rare intervals, affecting sometimes the chest, and sometimes other internal parts. He who is ready to administer final judgment on all mortals has sent this as a warning; and thereby he orders me to moderate the grief I feel for the decease of my friend, whom, perhaps, after not many years I shall follow.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_90">Epist</span>. Arm. ad <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_91">Seb</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_92">Egb</span>. 3 <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_93">Maii</span>. 1607. script.</span>].<br /><br />These words of Arminius we the more readily introduce as containing not only a testimony of his singular affection for <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_94">Halsberg</span>, and of a friendship never interrupted by a single difference; but also a sort of prophecy, or rather presentiment, of his own death, which happened in the course of two years after.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-53822646120227180032009-01-01T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-04T13:59:51.640-08:00Chapter 9 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 9, Part 2 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Amid all this excitement Arminius prosecuted his Academic prelections with unabated activity; and having brought to a close the exposition of Jonah, he entered upon a course of lectures on Malachi about the commencement of the year ensuing, 1606.<br /><br />On the 8th of February, he resigned his Rectorate according to the [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex. Epist. Arm.</span>] usual order; on which occasion he delivered that celebrated oration on '<span style="color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Religious Dissension,</span>' in which he unfolds its nature and effects, causes and remedies, with such freedom of speech as the weight of the subject itself, and the agitated circumstances of the church seemed to require; In particular, as the remedy commonly considered to be the most efficacious for allaying theological dissensions was a convention of the parties at variance, (which the Greeks call a synod, the Latins, a council,) he unfolded, on that same occasion, fully and piously, the principle on which a council of the kind referred to, ought to be constituted, so as to warrant the just and rational expectation that it will issue in results of the most salutary character.<br /><br />Nor could he charge himself, by any means, with having causelessly selected this as the theme of his oration; for he had long been aware that with the great majority of the clergy, and at this very time, nothing was more an object of desire than that the States-General should permit to be again summoned a National Synod, which, in former times, was wont to be convened once every three years, but had now for a very considerable time been suspended. For (to trace this matter a little further back) it was already turned twenty years since the Earl of Leceister, despising, and all but trampling under foot, the authority of the fathers of our country, had ordered a council of this description to be convoked at the Hague. On that occasion, when the great body of the clergy had lent their most zealous aid to those who were hatching revolutionary schemes, and aiming a deadly blow at the liberty of the Dutch Republic, they had, not without reason, been rebuked and admonished by the public voice of the States, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that, content with having lost Flanders, by traducing and calumniating the administration of the rulers, under the deceptive show of religion, and throwing a cloak over perfidy, they should abstain from bringing about the loss of Holland in the same way.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Em. Meterani Hist. Belgice conscript. et Hoofdii Hist.</span>]. It was the recollection, indeed, of that calamitous period, and the apprehension lest, perchance, certain turbulent zealots, under pretext of religion, should attempt anything anew that might detract from public authority, which long restrained the illustrious and mighty States from afterwards giving their assent to the renewed petition of the ecclesiastics for a National Synod. About the year 1597, however, when controversies had arisen in various places, particularly at Gouda, Hoorn, and Medenblick, not only respecting Divine Predestination, but also concerning the authority of the Belgic Confession, and Palatine Catechism, and the right and orthodox interpretation of certain phrases, the States of the province of Holland at length took the lead in granting the pastors under their jurisdiction permission to hold a synod;—for this end, in particular, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the Belgic Confession of Faith should be revised, and that it should be carefully considered in what way, most fitly, according to the word of God, the true doctrine and concord of the Reformed Church of the Netherlands, might be vindicated, preserved, and promoted, and the dissensions that had arisen be allayed.</span>'<br /><br />But although, so many years before the name of Arminius had begun to acquire celebrity in the Leyden Academy, the rulers of Holland had consented to the synod, still the States of the other provinces resisted the project — those of Utrecht being the stoutest and the longest to hold out. But seeing that the Dutch professors and pastors who differed at this time on the subject of predestination sought some support, each for his own opinion, in the words of the Confession and Catechism; and that these same formularies of consent did not define with sufficient clearness the questions agitated on either side; and that this present exigency of the Reformed cause seemed, in consequence, to require a more formal convention of the churches, by the effort and intervention of the men of greatest influence (including the name of Uitenbogaert, as he himself cheerfully owns) it was brought about that these rulers of Utrecht also subscribed to the wish so generally entertained. Leave, accordingly, was at length obtained (on the 15th March) from the States-General to convoke a National Synod on the selfsame terms as those on which, eight years previously, the rulers of Holland and Westfriesland had given their sanction to its being held. But here is the very decree, in express terms:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">The States-General of the United Provinces of the Netherlands, having considered and carefully weighed the reasons proposed and exhibited in their assembly both orally and in writing, in name of the Christian Reformed churches of the Netherlands, in order that permission should be granted to them for convening a National Synod of the said churches on the grounds set forth in the written petition referred to, after mature deliberation, have granted permission that it should be held, and by this same instrument they hereby grant permission. Wherefore, also, it hath pleased them that said National Synod be convoked in name of their illustrious Lords, as being the lawful magistrates — the protectors and defenders in these realms of the Christian Reformed religion — and to whom, in consequence, that right belongs; and that, as soon as said illustrious Lords, with the pastors of churches (whom it has been resolved to summon for this object on the very first opportunity) shall have communicated among themselves, and deliberated respecting the mode of holding the synod, and concerning the fit place and time, the said National Synod, with the revision of the Confession and Catechism of said churches, and of the ecclesiastical constitution heretofore in use among them shall (as has been wont every time to be done in such assemblies) be so instituted and conducted, in the name and fear of the Lord, that the fruit thence to be expected — namely, the confirmation of true piety among the inhabitants of these realms — may be abundantly realised. And all these things according to the rule and pattern of God's Sacred Word, to His glory, and for the safety of the Republic and the Church.</span>'<br /><br />We have thought it proper to introduce into our narrative this, the express form of the public decree, in order that the origin of the contentions with Arminius and his followers that arose respecting it, and the main reason why this convention of the churches was deferred, may be the more readily discerned. For the deputies of the churches took it very much amiss, that in the missive containing the public decree of the illustrious States special mention should be made of a contemplated revision of the Confession, Catechism, and ecclesiastical canons. Nay, more; even prior to its publication, and towards the close of the preceding year (30th November, 1605) they had begged, in a written petition, that the convocation of this synod should be instituted in the manner sanctioned by former usage and in general terms. They affirmed '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that by that single clause the entire doctrine comprehended in these summaries was called in question; that by this edict injury was done to these sacred canons of the Reformed faith, which were formerly received with so great applause; that the term <span style="font-style: italic;">revision </span>was forensic, nor was the act of revision ever insisted on unless when the authorised sentiment was not acquiesced in, but rather a demand made for its being retracted or changed; that by the insertion of the clause referred to there was reason to fear that those who were striving after a change of doctrine would be rendered more daring, and would conclude that power was conceded to them by public authority to press innovation to any extent.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid praefat. Act. Synod Dord.</span>].<br /><br />But a variety of reasons, on the other hand, and these of the gravest character, were advanced by not a few in vindication of the decree of the States. Thus it was contended, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that it was idle to dispute about the word <span style="font-style: italic;">revision</span>, since, taken not in its forensic but in its more general acceptation, it denoted any kind of re-examination. But taking the word in this stricter sense, it was not the case that the once authorised opinion was always changed by revision, but, on the contrary, it was sometimes thereby confirmed. The illustrious States of Holland had inserted in their decree, passed eight years before, the word <span style="font-style: italic;">resumption</span>. In most acts of synods, even prior to the public decree of the year 1597, mention was made of a <span style="font-style: italic;">repetition</span>. Nay, more; that distinguished defender of the Reformed doctrine, Caspar Heidanus, was not afraid to put on the title of that Catechism which he published at Antwerp in the year 15—, the words <span style="font-style: italic;">correction </span>and <span style="font-style: italic;">emendation</span>. At all events, the thing itself denoted by this word was of right and with good reason demanded by the fathers of their country and the supreme patrons of the Church. The sacred Scripture alone was placed beyond the liability of revision; nor was it right to arrogate this privilege to human writings. This, Beza, Zanchius, Olevianus, and other leaders of the Reformed religion — yea, and the very authors, too, of the Belgic Confession — openly professed. Even now there were extant, and could easily be produced, letters of the distinguished Saravia, celebrated among the original compilers of the Confession, who testifies that of those who applied their hand to this work it never came into the mind of one to make of it a rule of faith. In all the synods held in France a commencement was made by re-reading the Confession and soliciting expressions of opinion upon it [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Press. Declar. p. 41. 42.—Vid Grot. Piet. Ord. p. 52</span>]. The Augustan, yea and the Anglican and Helvetic Confessions, had been changed; and much more reasonable were it to try whether nothing could be amended in that Confession which was originally composed by no Synod whatever, but had been put together by some pious men, at a pre-eminently troublous time, in great haste, and for this end only, that it should serve the purpose of an apology to a hostile king. The same remark applied to the Catechism, inasmuch as the very leaders themselves of the Belgic Church had not drawn it up, but (as is wont to be done in cases of sudden necessity) had borrowed it from others. None otherwise did the famous Piscator judge; for certain strictures and animadversions of his on several questions of the Palatine Catechism were still extant [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. has stricturas inter Epist. Eccles. p. 166.</span>]. Even granting that after the scrutiny of forty years and more, nothing could be detected in the writings above-named which was either deficient or redundant, and which admitted of being expressed if not more truly, at least more fitly, and in a way better adapted to promote ecclesiastical peace; still the lawful examination of them would be attended with this benefit, that it would be evident to the world that the Reformed Churches in the Netherlands had not slid into that form of doctrine which they followed by accident or fashion, but in the exercise of reason and discrimination. At the name time they would, by an illustrious testimony, give publicity to the fact that these formularies were estimated by them at their true value, and not more; and what was of prime importance, the liberty thug admitted in its own place and time, and restrained within the limits of order, would interpose an obstacle to the license of private contradiction.</span>'<br /><br />But these and other reasons of the like kind by no means availed to prevent the great mass of the adversaries of Arminius from vehemently assailing, on every opportunity, the above form of convening the Synod. Nay, the ecclesiastical deputies transmitted a copy of it, with an accompanying letter (dated 19th April), to the churches of each several province, in which they signified how strenuously they had exerted themselves to get the above-named clause omitted [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Via. Praefat. Act. Synod. Dord.</span>]. From that time, it began to be carped at, and to be criticised by the churches with more acrimony than was meet. Foremost, however, in zeal to take up this business was the Synod of South Holland, held three months after, in the month of August, at Gorcum. For when the deputies of the churches had reported to it what steps they had taken in the matter of the National Synod, and what had been determined by the illustrious States, it seemed good to this assembly to enjoin on these deputies, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that, duly weighing the heads of the public decree respecting the Synod, they should not only see to it that justice be done to the decision of the illustrious States, but should also take care that nothing be done to the prejudice of the churches.</span>' The Synod moreover declared, 'that even if it were judged proper to revise the Confession and Catechism in the way and mode hitherto in use in a National Synod, they nevertheless wished that those who were to be summoned to that meeting at which the place and manner of holding the National Synod would necessarily fall to be considered, should be instructed to ask of the States-general, in name of the churches, that, for reasons above specified, the forementioned clause be struck out of the circulars of convocation, and that other words of milder import, and less likely to beget offence, might be substituted in its place.<br /><br />This same Synod besides resolved, that injunction be laid on all the pastors of the churches of South Holland, nay also, on the professors of sacred literature in the Academy of Leyden, to peruse and examine with all diligence the Confession and Catechism hitherto in use in those realms. It was further matter of deliberation whether it would be expedient that the strictures of the ministers on the above named books should be brought up, in the first instance, before this particular Synod and its deputies, or whether these had better be reserved to the National Synod [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Act. Synod. Gorcom. Art. 4.</span>]. Sufficient reasons were not wanting to have induced the persuasion that such anticipatory judgments of particular synods were altogether vain, and would not be free of hazard; and Uitenbogaert himself, in a very earnest discussion on that subject into which he entered with the president of this assembly, John Becius, showed, in many ways, under how great difficulties that ill-timed investigation which many were urging did labour, and how much it militated against the express decree and intention of the States [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Resp. ad Epist. Minist. Walach. p. 16.—Epist. Eccles. p. 170.</span>]. Notwithstanding all this, it was decreed in the same Synod, that, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">if, in these writings of the Confession and Catechism, any one had observed aught worthy of remark, he should signify the same, and set it forth in good and solid reasons and arguments, as speedily as practicable; and that if possible, before the next meeting of the classis.</span>' This decision, in spite of the objections of those who thought it wrong that the fulfilment of that ecclesiastical decree should be circumscribed within so small a portion of time, remained fixed and valid. By and by, too, this same Synod resolved to advise, by letter, the other particular churches and synods of the United Provinces, to watch with all diligence over this business, the care of which it had itself undertaken, and to urge every one of the ministers of their respective classes to the serious and thorough examination of the Confession and Catechism [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Epist. Eccles.</span>]. And finally, the province of communicating on this subject with the professors of sacred literature, and the regents of the theological college, was, in name of this Synod, consigned to John Uitenbogaert, William Coddaeus, Nathaniel Marlandus, and Egbert AEmilius.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-76916109281502212192008-12-31T00:00:00.000-08:002009-01-04T13:53:48.763-08:00Chapter 9 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 9, Part 1 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER IX.<br /><br />ECCLESIASTICAL EXCITEMENT, AND PROCEEDINGS WITH A VIEW TO A NATIONAL SYNOD; FRESH CALUMNIES AGAINST ARMINIUS. A.D 1605-1607.<br /><br />A few weeks after the curators of the University had, by convening the professors of theology, succeeded in maintaining Academic peace, the Synod of South Holland, which met at Rotterdam on the 30th August, 1605, proceeded to agitate measures in connexion with this business, of a much more impetuous description. After the delegates from the Classis of Dort had put them in possession of the grounds on which the above-named <span style="font-style: italic;">gravamen </span>had been transmitted, and the deputies of the Synod had in like manner made them aware of the state of the Leyden Academy, and of their interview with Arminius and the rest of the professors, they decided, after mature deliberation, that a timely check ought to be opposed to this growing evil, and that the appropriate remedy ought not to be delayed under the uncertain hope of a National Synod. It was accordingly concluded to institute, by means of their deputies, a very strict inquiry into what articles in particular furnished matter of debate among the theological students in the Leyden Academy; and to request the honourable curators to make it imperative on the professors of theology to declare openly and sincerely their own opinions respecting the same [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. prefat. Act. Synod. Dord.</span>].<br /><br />In fulfilment of this decree, the synodical deputies, Francis Lansbergius, Festus Hommius, and their associates, set out for Leyden, and on the 2nd November handed in nine questions to the curators respecting the points which, as they understood, constituted at this time the main subjects of discussion. They at the same time requested that, in virtue of their authority, the curators would render it imperative on the professors of theology fully to unfold their own opinion on these points. But the honourable curators looked upon this demand as preposterous, inasmuch as the professors themselves had informed them in writing, not long before, of the state and weight of the controversies referred to. They therefore openly declared '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that to this mode of procedure they could by no means lend their sanction;</span>' and added '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that there was no small ground for the hope that a National Synod would be obtained; on which account they judged it to be more advisable to reserve these questions to it, than by further investigation of them to furnish occasion for strife.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Declar. Arm. coram, Ord.</span>]. On receiving this answer the deputies further insisted, that by the kind permission of the curators they might be at liberty to put these questions to the professors concerned, in order to discover what answers each of them would voluntarily and spontaneously give; but here they encountered the same repulse.<br /><br />All these transactions, however, were managed with such secrecy, as respects Arminius, that he was for some time ignorant of the arrival of these deputies in the city, and was only subsequently made aware of it through his friends. By the diligence of these friends he also succeeded in laying his hands upon the very questions which the deputies of the churches had handed in to the curators; and thence snatched occasion to draw up, for the benefit of his disciples, brief answers to these, and to array in opposition to them as many questions in return [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vide sis has quaestiones et Arminii responsa in ejus Eperibus.</span>].<br /><br />Circumstanced as he was at such a conjuncture, he could not suppress his feelings, but gave vent to them in the following complaint in regard to his position, which occurs in a letter to Uitenbogaert, dated 27th October, 1605:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">How difficult is it in these inauspicious times, when such vehemence of spirit prevails, to be thoroughly devoted at once to truth and to peace! Were it not that the consciousness of integrity, the favourable judgments of some good men, yea, and the palpable and manifest fruits which I see arising from my labours, reanimate my spirits, I should scarcely at times be able to bear myself erect. But thanks be to God who imparts strength and constancy to my spirit, and makes me comparatively easy whatever may be the issue.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Arm. Epist. ad J. Uitenb. 27 Octob. 1605.</span>]<br /><br />Notwithstanding these annoyances, Arminius [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Via Ep. Eccles. p. 149.</span>] strenuously discharged the duties of his office; and endeavoured, above all, to propagate increasingly the truth, as far as known by him, without noise or contention, to the utmost of his power. For this end he made it his study, on all occasions, to keep himself within the terms of the Confession and Catechism — at least not to advance anything which might be confuted by these standards, nay which was not fairly and plainly reconcilable therewith. For although in these formularies of consent he had probably observed some things which at times appeared to favour the sentiments opposed to those he had embraced, and which he could have wished to find expressed in terms more closely harmonising with his own opinion, he yet thought he could continue within these terms; and that, under the privilege of a mild interpretation, he ought to soften the harshness of certain phrases, and wait until a fuller interpretation and revision should be applied to them by a National Synod. For he thought that he could act thus in the exercise of the same right as that by which all those followers of Calvin who were subjects of the Emperor of Germany judged that they could lawfully, and with a good conscience, subscribe to the entire Confession of Augsburg, and to all and sundry of the articles it contained [Vid<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">. </span>Epiat<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">. </span>Examen<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"> contra </span>Capel<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">. in </span>Oper<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">. </span>ejus<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"> i. Tom. 2. part. p. 168.</span>]. This, however, without the aid of a liberal interpretation was more than they could well do; for between the Augsburg and other Confessions there was so great an air of contradiction that the Genevan divines did not think it advisable to publish them without the antidote of their own interpretations and cautions. Treading in their foot-prints, and rejoicing in the same right, he felt that he was doing nothing whatever unworthy of a Reformed divine if, for the confirmation of his own opinion on Divine predestination, and other heads of the Christian faith, he should call to his aid not only the Sacred Oracles, but also the above-named formularies of consent. It was for this reason that, when about to hold a disputation at one time in his own regular class on the subject of predestination, he ordered the student who was to undertake the part of respondent to shape his theses on this subject in the very words of the Confession [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Declar. Arm. coram Ord.</span>].<br /><br />About that same period he held a very learned disputation <span style="font-style: italic;">on the comparison between the law and the gospel</span>, and on the agreement and difference between the Old Testament and the New; the part of respondent, under his presidency, having fallen on that highly-cultivated youth, and distinguished ornament at an after period to the Leyden Academy and to literature — Peter Cunaeus. Towards the close of this disputation some one happened to object '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that man could not but transgress the law, seeing that the decree of God, which determined that he should transgress, could not be resisted.</span>' Although Arminius was under the necessity of replying to this objection, yet he made it imperative that in future no such statement should be advanced without this or the like protestation: <span style="font-style: italic;">Let no blasphemy be supposed!</span> So offensive, moreover, was that audacious proposition of this student of divinity to some who had been present at the disputation, that one of them, a man of no small authority, shortly after expressed his loathing of it in the presence of Arminius; and gave it as his counsel that things of that sort ought to be checked, and authority interposed against such disgraceful objections. Arminius, however, somewhat excused the deed, declaring that the objector had been so instructed by certain divines; and that authoritative interference was scarcely practicable, on account of the vehemence of some who were of a different, mind [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm.</span>].<br /><br />Meanwhile he was inspired with a greatly increased measure of firmness and confidence by the very large number of auditors whom the singular grace of his style, both of speaking and teaching, and his lucid interpretation of the Sacred Writings, daily attracted to his public lectures. His private class, moreover, flourished at this time to such a degree, that one class would not have sufficed but for the fear which had taken possession of many, that too much familiarity with him might turn out, at some future period, to be prejudicial to their interests. Hence, as envy is proverbially the evil genius, for the most part, not only of virtue but also of genuine erudition, it can hardly appear surprising to any one if Arminius, by reason of his daily increasing renown for learning, was obliged, in his turn, to encounter this hydra. The extent, at all events, to which, in that particular, Gomarus shared in the infirmity of our common nature, may be inferred from this circumstance: accosting Arminius one day as he was passing out of the academic hall, he threw this in his teeth with abundant bitterness and bile — '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0); font-style: italic;">They say you are more learned than Junius.</span>'<br /><br />About the same time, Peter Plancius, pastor of the church in Amsterdam, inveighed from the pulpit in the most virulent strain against Arminius and his friends and followers, running them down under the name of Coornhertians<span style="font-style: italic;">, </span>Neo<span style="font-style: italic;">-</span>Pelagians<span style="font-style: italic;">, and as far worse than </span>Pelagius<span style="font-style: italic;"> himself</span>. So effervescent was he, that he appeared, even to vulgar minds, to have excited himself into extravagance, so as to connect things together which bore to each other no just relation of sequence or coherence. Others, too, after his example, either incensed by an inveterate hatred against Arminius, or impelled by the sort of pious solicitude with which they embraced the received doctrine, began to agitate before the people, in the vernacular tongue, those questions which had furnished themes of more subtle disputation in the benches of the Academy: and this they did with egregious departures from the truth, and with minds as little as possible attuned to the work of meekly edifying the Christian people [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm.—Vid. Respons. ad Epist. Minist. Walachriens. p. 9.</span>]. Some assiduously impressed it upon the promiscuous multitude that the doctrine of the Belgic Confession, sealed with the blood of many martyrs, was being called in question; others that a motley religion was in the course of being drawn up, and that it was in contemplation to introduce a system of libertinism. On the other hand, Arminius, finding himself under the imperative necessity of vindicating his own innocence, both publicly and privately, pleaded his cause at this conjuncture, in a remarkably calm and placid spirit; for (to use his own words) he '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">reckoned this to be by far the noblest kind of revenge, to bring it about, by means of well-doing, that they should have the worse who spurned at proffered friendship and fraternity.</span>' Moreover, in order to possess the minds of the students with the genuine love of peace, he judged that nothing ought more to be impressed upon them than that they should endeavour to distinguish, according to the standard of the Sacred Word, not only between truth and falsehood, but also between the greater and less degrees in which different articles of religion are to be held as essential [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex. Epist. Arm.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-30023946841124260272008-12-30T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-30T15:29:22.094-08:00Chapter 8 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 8, Part 3 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Somewhat similar, about this time, was the treatment experienced by Abraham <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">Vlietius</span>, from <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1">Voorburg</span>, who, besides attending <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2">Kuchlinus</span>, availed himself also of the instructions of Arminius. At a public disputation held on the 30<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_3">th</span> April, under the presidency of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_4">Gomarus</span>, on the subject of <span style="font-style: italic;">Divine Providence</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_5">Vid</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_6">Epist</span>. Arm.</span>], <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_7">Vlietius</span>, according to the custom of the Academy, and for the sake of exercising his powers, advanced, in a tone of sufficient moderation, certain solid arguments against the theses that were subjected to discussion. By this act he stirred the bile of the distinguished president to such a degree, that not content with replying to the objector in very acrimonious terms, he proceeded, with mind and feature thoroughly discomposed, and with little attempt at disguise, to traduce Arminius, who, he presumed—incorrectly, however—was the artificer and prompter of the objections in question. Arminius, who was present at this scene, bore with tranquil mind the insult thus perpetrated upon himself and his disciple, and judged it best to put up with it in silence. But when by this transaction <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_8">Vlietius</span> had drawn on himself the odium of many, as if his intention had been to excite an uproar, Arminius, to prevent the affair from entailing any injury on his beloved disciple, cheerfully interposed in support of his wronged reputation, with the following testimonial:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">That Abraham <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_9">Vlietius</span>, in a disputation concerning Divine Providence held on the 30<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_10">th</span> April, 1605, was bound, from the office he then undertook in the college of disputants, to offer objections; and that, in objecting, he kept himself within the bounds of modesty, and advanced nothing unworthy either of himself or his auditory, and consequently gave no just occasion of complaint, I hereby testify as requested.</span>'<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">James Arminius,</span>'<br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Rector of the Academy for the time being, and myself an eye and ear witness.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex ipso Arm. autograph.</span>].<br /><br />At the same time, moreover, in which these things happened, a somewhat serious annoyance was stirred against Arminius by his uncle and colleague, John <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_11">Kuchlinus</span>, Regent of the Theological Faculty. This person, under the pretext of an ardent zeal for the maintenance of the truth, and in opposition to novel doctrines and the active emissaries of innovation; and also of an apprehension lest the flower of their youth and the hope of the Church should be imbued with pernicious errors, left no stone unturned by which he might drive all the students of the Theological College away from the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_12">prelections</span> of Arminius [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_13">Epist</span>. Arm.</span>]. Accordingly, changing the hour for his own <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_14">prelections</span>, he chose the very hour in which Arminius had been accustomed to hold his, as that in which he would expound the several heads of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_15">Belgic</span> Confession; and he ordered all the students to be present at these academical exercises. This attempt, however, the subject of our memoir very spiritedly withstood; and having lodged a complaint respecting it to the honourable magistrates of the city of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_16">Leyden</span>, he succeeded in getting the whole <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_17">affair</span> deferred until the next arrival of the curators of the Academy.<br /><br />Meanwhile, in order to counteract with all his might the calumnies of those who flung against him the charge of error on the subject of Divine Providence, he held a public disputation on the 4<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_18">th</span> May, 1605, '<span style="color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Concerning the righteousness and efficacy of Divine Providence respecting evil;</span>' and, as may be seen in his polished theses on that subject, he very learnedly explained in what manner it had to do, not only with the beginning, but also with the progress and with the end of sin. Making allusion in another place [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">In his letter to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_19">Hippolytus</span> a <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_20">Collibus</span>.</span>] to this circumstance and that controversy, he observes: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">There are two stumbling-blocks against which I am solicitously on my guard — not to make God the author of sin, and not to do away with the freedom inherent in the human will: which two things if any one knows to avoid, there is no action he shall imagine which I will not most cheerfully allow to be ascribed to the Providence of God, if due regard be only had to the divine excellence.</span>'<br /><br />Shortly after the Academy had listened to his discussion on the subject of Divine Providence, Arminius, with the view of clearing himself of the charge of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_21">Pelagianism</span>, produced and exposed for public examination, on the 23rd July, his theses '<span style="color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">concerning free will and its powers.</span>' In drawing up these he declared, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that his grand aim had been to promote the peace of the Church; that he had set forth nothing which bordered on falsehood, but, on the contrary, had suppressed several truths to which he was prepared to give expression, being well aware that it was one mode of procedure to suppress what was true, and another to speak what was false: the latter was in no case lawful; the former, however, was sometimes, yea very often, expedient.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Arm. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_22">Epist</span>. 25 <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_23">Julii</span> script.</span>]. Moreover, as he deemed it his duty to act cautiously, and take the utmost possible care that the justice of his cause and the moderation of his spirit might commend themselves to good and prudent men, he offered on every occasion to all who were meditating strife with him, what he had formerly offered to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_24">Helmichius</span> and others — a conference, whether private or public, on the subject of these theological controversies.<br /><br />This method, however, was not quite agreeable to the adversaries of Arminius; it pleased them to ply him with another mode of attack. They sent to him, accordingly, these deputies of the churches of South and North Holland, Francis <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_25">Lansbergius</span>, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_26">Libertus</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_27">Fraxinus</span>, Daniel <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_28">Dolegius</span>, John <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_29">Bogardus</span>, and James <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_30">Dolandus</span>, who arrived on the 30<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_31">th</span> June (1605). In explaining to him the object of their mission, they entered into a narration of those things which were extensively circulated concerning him and his doctrine; and how great was the solicitude felt by all the churches lest, the integrity of the Reformed doctrine being undermined, and the young men imbued with unsound opinions, this affair should at last eventuate in the destruction of the Church. They further stated that several candidates for the sacred office, when admitted at any time to examination before their <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_32">classis</span>, gave answers altogether new and repugnant to the received doctrine, and sheltered themselves under the authority of Arminius [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_33">Declarat</span>. Arm. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_34">coram</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_35">Ordinib</span>.—<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_36">Vide</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_37">et</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_38">Prajfat</span>. Act. Synod. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_39">Dord</span></span>]. They then begged of Arminius that he would not refuse to give an explanation of the matter, and to enter into a friendly conference with them.<br /><br />Arminius replied, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that this mode of procedure was to him in the highest degree displeasing. For were he to submit to it, he would be obliged very often to descend to conferences of this sort; nor would he ever be free from liability to this annoyance as often as any student in his examination, in giving some novel answer, should make a foolish appeal to the authority of his preceptor. To him, therefore, it appeared to be a more advisable course, that brethren, on hearing a novel answer of such a kind as seemed to be at variance with the Confession or Catechism of the Reformed Churches, ought immediately to confront that student with himself, he for his part being prepared, for the sake of expediting the business, to repair at his own expense to whatever place the brethren might choose.</span>'<br /><br />Not content, however, with this general answer, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_40">Lansbergius</span>, in name of the rest, pressed still more urgently the conference proposed, when the subject of our memoir gave this further reply: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">He did not see on what principle he could enter into that conference. For, seeing that they bore the title of deputies, and would render an account of their proceedings to the synod, he was not at liberty to enter upon this business without the cognizance and consent, yea even the command, of those to whose authority he was subject. Nay more; no trivial hazard would thence accrue to himself, if, whatever might at any time be reported to the synod, as to the issue of this conference, he should be obliged to commit the whole detail entirely to their faith. Besides, as he was by no means conscious of having ever taught any doctrine which was antagonistic to the Sacred Writings, the Confession, or the Catechism, he did not see on what reasons this petition of theirs was grounded. The burden of proof devolved on those who asserted the contrary; or, failing proof, of confessing their fault. If, however, they were disposed to lay aside the character of deputies, he would not shrink from holding a conference about doctrine with them as private pastors, and from descending into that arena, there and then: — but on this condition, that whatever liberty in expounding their own opinion, and refuting the contrary, they vindicated for themselves, that self-same liberty should be competent to him. If in this way either party should satisfy the other, the entire business would be transacted; if it came short of this, it must be understood, that no report of it shall anywhere be rendered, but that the whole shall be referred to a National Council.</span>' But at last, when he perceived that that plan and that condition were rejected by them, he asked them, as they were ready to take their departure, that they would propose the same conference which they had demanded of him, to his colleagues as well, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_41">Gomarus</span> and <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_42">Trelcatius</span>; adding, and adducing many reasons in corroboration of the statement, that he had not given greater occasion for this demand than either of them. The deputies then promised to comply with this request, and having informed Arminius, some time after, that they had implemented their promise, they departed without having effected their object.<br /><br />Meanwhile Arminius could not prevent the circulation of very various and frequent rumours respecting this affair; many in bad faith making it known, but suppressing all mention of his reasons for rejecting this conference, and of the description of conference which he himself had proposed. But these and other reasons which deterred him from formal conferences of that sort with <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_43">synodical</span> deputies, he explained on a subsequent occasion much more fully and distinctly in the presence of the illustrious States of Holland. His reasons as then advanced were in substance as follows.<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);"><span style="font-style: italic;">First</span>, He did not reckon himself amenable to either Synod of Holland, South or North; on the contrary, he had other masters without whose consent and command it would have been unlawful in him to have engaged in such a conference. To this reason may be added</span><br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">A <span style="font-style: italic;">second</span>, namely, the great inequality of such a conference; considering that between those who are about to confer on whatever matters, the utmost equality ought to subsist. For it is evident that they came to him armed with a certain public authority, while he sustained the character only of a private individual. They were in number several, but he stood alone; not only destitute of persons to aid him, but of persons to witness the proceedings contemplated. Nay more, these deputies were not there in their own right, but were obliged to hang by the judgment of their superiors, and defend their opinion concerning religion to the last extremity; so much so, indeed, that they could not have been at liberty to admit the force even of the strongest arguments which he could have adduced. As he, on the other hand, stood on his own right, he was in a condition, by bringing his conscience alone to decide, unfettered by the prejudgment of any one, to admit whatever it might have declared to him, on demonstrative grounds, to have been in accordance with truth.</span><br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);"><span style="font-style: italic;">Thirdly</span>, The report which these deputies would have given in to their superiors, after the conference had been held, could not but turn out in many respects to his serious injury; for, either by defect of understanding or of memory, or by prejudiced feelings, some things might easily have been added or omitted, and his words might have been repeated either in such a sense, or in such an order, as altogether to contradict his sentiments, and the actual facts of the case; while a larger measure of credit would have been accorded to these deputies, than would have been accorded to him, a private individual. Nay more; in this way he would have conceded to this ecclesiastical convention a certain prerogative over him, which, however, in his judgment he could not rightly concede, consistently with the dignity of his office, and the authority of those on whose power he was dependent.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_44">Vid</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_45">Declarat</span>. Arm. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_46">coram</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_47">Ordinib</span>.</span>].<br /><br />Such were the reasons which induced Arminius to decline entering into conferences of the kind proposed. In what light he regarded the perverse machinations of certain parties at this conjuncture he himself thus declares in a letter to Adrian <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_48">Borrius</span>, of date July 25, 1605: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I see right well that my adversaries act in this way to raise a tumult in order that I, accused of being at least the occasion of the disturbance, may be compelled to rush forth from my concealment, and declare myself openly; in which event they seem to promise themselves certain victory. But so much the more on this account will I keep myself at home, and advance those things which in my judgment may best do service to truth, to peace, and to the times; although I know that they would be disappointed of their hope even were I to declare myself openly to them. True, it is an old saving, that to drag a heretic, or a heresy forth to the light, is to confute that heretic or heresy; but this is the boast also of those who chant paeans before the victory. It were hard for them to convict of heresy those things which, with inflated cheeks they vociferate to be heretical. They complain, I understand, that I did not declare to them my opinion, and the arguments on which it rests; and they urge as a pretext for their complaint, that it is my intention to make an unforeseen attack upon the min the National Synod, and to obtrude opinions upon them of which they had not been aware, and to confirm these by arguments, the confutation of which they shall not have had it in their power to premeditate. They think that that assembly ought to be conducted in the same manner as formerly; and are not aware that I, trusting to the goodness of my conscience and my cause, do not shrink from timely inquiry and examination, even to the most rigorous extent.</span>'<br /><br />Meanwhile, three days after penning these words, the consistory of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_49">Leyden</span>, of which he himself too formed a part, and was regarded as a member, appears to have importunately asked of him, at the instigation of certain zealots, a conference respecting his religious views, not unlike that which the delegates of the churches had demanded. In name of the consistory there were delegated to him, on the 28<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_50">th</span> July, these honourable and distinguished men, <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_51">Phaedo</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_52">Broekhoven</span> and Paul <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_53">Merula</span> — the one professor of history, the other a burgomaster of the city of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_54">Leyden</span>, and both elders of the church — who urged him in gentle terms that he would treat with his colleagues, in the presence of the consistory, concerning those things in the received doctrine to which he took exception. In this way it might be ascertained whether, and in what points, he agreed or disagreed with his colleagues and the other pastors of the Church. They added, however, that if he gave his assent to this petition they would speak with others also respecting the matter; but if not, that no further steps would be taken in the affair. To this Arminius replied almost in the same terms as he had shortly before employed to the deputies of the churches, namely, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he could not comply with this demand without the permission of the honourable curators of the Academy; nor could he perceive what benefit would <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_55">thance</span> accrue to the Church.</span>' These reasons he followed up by others to the same effect, which proved thoroughly satisfactory to these two men; so much so, indeed, that they gave it as their opinion that no further proceedings should be taken in the matter [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Arm. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_56">declar</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_57">coram</span> <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_58">Ordin</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_59">Vid</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_60">prefat</span>. Act. Synod. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_61">Dord</span>.—<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_62">Trigland</span>. Hist.</span>].<br /><br />His adversaries, nevertheless, determined in no respect whatever to <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_63">intermit</span> their <span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_64">zeal</span>, ceased not to spread, and beyond measure to exaggerate, the rumours afloat as to the very serious dissensions that had arisen between the professors and the pastors of the Church. The result was, that the time being now at hand at which the annual Synod of the churches of North and South Holland respectively were wont to be held, among the other '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0); font-style: italic;"><span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_65">gravamina</span></span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">That is grievances, and all matters deemed important, whether of the nature of grievances or not.</span>] (as they are called) which, according to the custom of the churches, are commonly sent beforehand by the several <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_66">classis</span>, this too had been transmitted by the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_67">Classis</span> of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_68">Dort</span>: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Whereas reports prevail that in the Academy and Church of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_69">Leyden</span>, certain controversies have arisen concerning the doctrine of the Reformed Churches, the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_70">Classis</span> is of opinion that it is necessary that the Synod should deliberate as to the means by which these controversies may be most advantageously and speedily allayed; in order that all schisms and scandals which might thence arise may be seasonably put out of the way, and the union of the Reformed Churches be preserved in contrariety to the calumnies of adversaries.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_71">prefat</span>. Act. Synod. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_72">Pord</span>.—<span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_73">Uitcnb</span>. <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_74">Ilist</span>.</span>]. The author of the preface to the Acts of the Synod of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_75">Dort</span>, in making mention of this gravamen, further leaves it on record that Arminius took it in the highest degree amiss, and left no pains <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_76">untaken</span> by which to get it recalled. That it displeased Arminius, indeed, we are not disposed to deny. But assuredly of any pains he took to get this document recalled, there exists, so far as we are aware, no evidence whatever.<br /><br />Be this as it may, the honourable curators of the Academy, and magistrates of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_77">Leyden</span>, suspecting on good grounds that the above-named article of the <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_78">Classis</span> of <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_79">Dort</span> aimed solely at this, that Arminius and his followers should be impeached for corrupt doctrine, concentrated all their counsels and efforts on the one object of getting these schemes crushed in the bud. With this view, they called together the professors of theology, and producing the gravamen above-named, they put to them the question, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Whether controversies of that description had been observed by them?</span>' To this, after they had obtained a reasonable time for deliberation, and had first considered the matter among themselves, and duly weighed it apart, — Gomarus, Arminius, and Trelcatius, unanimously replied, and straightway (on the 10th of August) confirmed the reply, in its written form, with their respective signatures, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that they could have wished that the Classis of Dort had acted in this matter in a better and more orderly way; among the students, indeed, there was, they believed, more disputation than was agreeable to them; but among themselves, the professors of theology, there was no dissension, as indeed any one might see, in regard to the fundamentals of doctrine. Further, they would do their endeavour to get whatever discussions of that kind had arisen among the students diminished.</span>' This answer was handed in the same day, to the Rev. John Kuchlinus, Regent of the theological college, who replied that he concurred in what had been advanced by the professors of theology, and subscribed the same declaration [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex gestis Acad. citatis a Bertio in Orat. Funeb. in obit. Arm.</span>].<br /><br />But on what principle Gomarus could prevail on himself to sign this testimony, was to not a few just matter of astonishment. For it was notorious that besides assailing the opinion of Arminius on predestination in a public and sufficiently acrimonious disputation, he had also, and that, too, repeatedly, from the pulpit, exaggerated the importance of this controversy to such a degree as to imply that it was in his estimation fundamental [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex tractatu quodam Bertii, Belgice conscripto.</span>]. Others, again, inferred from this act of Gomarus, that he was disposed at that time, notwithstanding this difference of opinion, to cultivate a true friendship with Arminius, and would actually have done so, had he not heen prevented by the intemperate clamours of others from prosecuting this aim. That Arminius also cherished the same hope is manifest from the following words extracted from a letter he addressed to Uitenbogaert (on the 7th June, 1605):— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Between Gomarus and me there is peace; and I have reason to believe it will be steady enough, unless he lend an ear to him who seems to act only for this, that he may not be found to have been a false prophet. On the other hand I will do my best to make my moderation and equanimity manifest to all, that I may have the superiority at once in the goodness of my cause, and in my mode of action.'</span> Nor must we omit in this connexion what is reported by not a few, namely that Gomarus himself was wont at times to declare to his intimate friends with a feeling of regret, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he could easily have been induced to cultivate peace with Arminius but for the importunity of the churches and their deputies, which threw an obstacle in the way of this salutary desire.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Hist. narrat. Synod. Dord. Belg. conscript. a J. W.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-38599247296453422512008-12-29T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-29T00:00:01.337-08:00Chapter 8 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 8, Part 2 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />His disciples and admirers, however, began in those days to be accused of the same crimes which were imputed to himself; the discourses and arguments by which they sought to establish the doctrines of the Christian faith being subjected to misinterpretation. Hence the rumour gained currency that those who had returned from the Academy, or turned aside to other academies, were wantonly insulting the Reformed Churches, by disputing, contradicting, and vilifying the received doctrine. Nor were there wanting those who, by a certain guileful art, narrowly watched several students of theology that were on more familiar terms with our doctor, and were in the habit of attending his private meetings; and from their answers — which, as may occasionally be expected of very young men, were at tunes somewhat unguarded, and stretched beyond the mind of their master — they snatched a handle and an opportunity of foully traducing, to the people, Arminius himself. More severe investigations, besides, began to be instituted by certain Classes and ecclesiastical assemblies against his disciples: and their words and actions were watched more sternly than was meet.<br /><br />This was exemplified by the case of John Narsius of Dort, who at this time prosecuted under Arminius the study of theology with a zeal not to be repented of, and who afterwards occupied a position of eminence as pastor of the church at Grave. Being a young man of very practised and highly polished intellect, he was supported, in hope of the Church, at the expense of the State of Amsterdam; and although in the year immediately preceding, on being privately examined by the pastors of this very celebrated city, he had given them the very highest satisfaction, this in no degree availed to exempt him from the suspicion of having imbibed impious opinions from his preceptor. In order, therefore, to elicit his mind, these same clergymen thought proper (on the 13th Jan., 1605) to order certain theological questions to be drawn up in writing, that to these Narsius might reply, also in writing. That the reader may be enabled to judge the more accurately of the controversies agitated at this tune, it may not be out of place here to present these very questions in detail, along with the answers of Narsius himself.<br /><br />Question I. Whether God so directs and governs the free will of man that he is neither obliged, nor is able, to do anything in any other mode, and any further, than precisely as God has decreed?<br /><br />Answered in the affirmative; but with this qualification, that Divine Providence be not held to take away the free will of man, in the act of directing the same.<br /><br />Quest. II. Whether God governs the actions of the wicked in this manner, that they no otherwise act, or can act, than as God has determined?<br /><br />Ans. Yes; if the question is to be taken in this sense, that those who had come to apprehend Christ [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Referring evidently to Acts ii. 23; iv. 28.—TR.</span>], could not have done that until God permitted it.<br /><br />Quest. III. Whether whatsoever things, come to pass contingently in respect of men (that is, so that they can come to pass, or not come to pass, and can happen in this manner, or in another) also come to pass thus contingently in respect of providence and of the divine decree?<br /><br />Ans. I have to request, brethren, that, seeing the word <span style="font-style: italic;">contingently </span>is not to be found in the Sacred Volume, nor in the Belgic Confession, nor yet in the Palatine Catechism, and is moreover used in a variety of senses by scholastic writers, you will submit to rest satisfied with this my confession: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Nothing comes to pass by chance, but whatsoever things come to pass, whether of great account or small, whether good or bad, are subjected to the government and direction of Divine Providence; in such a manner, indeed, that those things which seem to us to be uncertain, and to happen by chance, nevertheless, in respect of the most wise and omnipotent providence of God, and of his eternal decree, happen certainly and immutably; although, of the evil itself which is committed, he is in no respect the author.</span>'<br /><br />Quest. IV. Whether the same place can always be assigned to free will in good actions, as can be assigned in bad?<br /><br />Ans. To man, after the fall, and in a state of depravity, only a free will belongs which is prone to evil, so that he is the slave of sin and Satan.<br /><br />Quest. V. Whether men before regeneration may have a good will, which is truly good, or may have true faith?<br /><br />Ans. Man considered as fallen has, from himself, neither a good will which is truly good, nor faith, nor regeneration.<br /><br />Quest. VI. Whether all to whom the Divine law has been made known, can act genuine repentance, and properly convert themselves to God?<br /><br />Ans. By no means.<br /><br />Quest. VII. Whether power to believe is always supplied, by the self-same operation, to all to whom the doctrine of the gospel is announced?<br /><br />Ans. To man considered in himself belongs no power of believing; but whosoever at any time believe, these same persons receive that faith in no other way than by the special illumination of the Holy Spirit; so that faith is the gift of God, freely bestowed, apart from all consideration of merit. So far, however, as concerns other questions, for example, what kind of grace does God bestow through the preaching of the gospel, and in addition thereto; in what manner that celestial influence operates on, and concurs with, the intellect and the will; whether, moreover, to those who have no faith in Christ, common grace of that kind be given through, or independently of, the preaching of the evangelical doctrine, by which they can believe, and consequently by it be rendered inexcusable? Respecting these and other points I find nothing explicit in the Belgic Confession and Catechism, nor do I venture at present to maintain anything whatever, either on one side or on the other. On the contrary, my wish is to adhere cordially to the Confession and Catechism, and keep myself open to light.<br /><br />Quest. VIII. Whether there be in all men original sin? Whence that flows into human nature — namely, whether through the soul of the parents, or through the body, or from any other source?<br /><br />Ans. Original sin has place in all mortals whatsoever, with the exception of Christ. But whether it reaches us through the soul or through the body does not, in my judgment at least, sufficiently appear from the sacred writings. Yet I cannot but believe that the thing itself, by a wonderful, indeed, but still just dispensation of God, flows into us from the fall of Adam, in whom we have all sinned. All the descendants of Adam, moreover, have a certain innate corruption which renders them useless in respect to anything good, and prone to all that is evil, and the remains of which even the regenerate themselves deeply feel.<br /><br />Quest. IX. Whether the words of Matthew chap. xviii. v. 17, 18, '<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 102);">Tell it to the Church,</span>' &c., do not refer to ecclesiastical discipline?<br /><br />Ans. That ecclesiastical discipline has been instituted by God, I believe; nor am I prepared to deny that the passage cited bears reference to it [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Uitenb. Hist. Eccles. Belgico idiom. conscript. p. 327.</span>].<br /><br />Such were the replies of Narsius, from whose mouth (if he had chanced to advance anything unguardedly) not a few endeavoured to fish out somewhat that might afford ground of attack or of cavil against his preceptor Arminius. Great, however, as was the caution he used in the foregoing answers, he was unable to satisfy these ecclesiastical Aristarchuses [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Aristarchus was a grammarian of Alexandria, who subjected Homer's poetry to very hard criticism. Hence his name became a proverbial designation for any severe critic. —TR.</span>]. So far from this, being suspected and hated amongst them on the ground of his close intimacy with Arminius, he shared the same lot with him from that tune forward, until he was driven, by the impetuosity of adversaries, to identify himself with the party of the Remonstrants, after the death of Arminius, and openly to patronise their opinions and their cause.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-56333939158295766832008-12-28T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-28T22:25:25.878-08:00Chapter 8 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 8, Part 1 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER VIII.<br /><br />SUSPICIONS AGAINST ARMINIUS, AND RIGOROUS MEASURES WITH HIS STUDENTS; FRESH DISPUTATIONS OF COMMENCEMENT OF ECCLESIASTICAL PROCEEDINGS. A.D. 1604, 1605.<br /><br />Not to wander from the thread of our narrative, although the opinion of Gomarus above-named, and which he publicly defended, on the subject of Divine predestination, appeared — on the express admission even of his greatest supporters — to stretch somewhat beyond the limits of the Belgic Confession, and to transcend the doctrine prevailingly taught in the churches of the Reformed, still Arminius had to bear a crushing load of jealous feeling; and his adversaries left no means untried by which to burn some brand of contumely into his rising reputation. Immediately through the town of Leyden, and thence through all Holland, the rumour was set afloat that the professors of sacred literature differed seriously among themselves. The matter was everywhere in the mouths of carders, furriers, weavers, and other artisans of that class — chiefly Flemings, with whom Leyden abounded. Many, too, in their gross ignorance of theological controversies, attributed to Arminius the opinion of Gomarus, and to Gomarus, on the other hand, the opinion of Arminius [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Uiteub. Hist. Eccles.</span>].<br /><br />In the beginning of next year (1605) the subject of our memoir was presented with the fasces<span style="font-style: italic;"> </span>of the Academy, and the title of <span style="font-style: italic;">Rector Magnific</span>; but though he could discern that, with this increased dignity, he was regarded by many with an increased measure of esteem, he saw not less plainly that others abated nothing whatever of their alienation of mind, and of their clandestine endeavours against him. Many put the worst construction on his best words and deeds. If at any tune, in building up his opinion on certain controversies, he happened now and then to advance certain arguments which were also employed by Popish writers themselves, by Lutherans, and others besides the Reformed, the clamour was forthwith raised by ignorant persons that he had gone over to the enemy's camp. Besides, they set it down as a fault, that in establishing some doctrines of the Christian faith, and vindicating the truth of these against the contempt poured upon them by adversaries, he expressed the opinion that certain frivolous arguments, little apposite to the point, ought to be utterly discarded, and others of much greater strength to be substituted in their place. In this he trod in the footsteps of Calvin himself, who had expounded very differently from the ancient doctors of the Church many passages of the Old Testament which they had often and inconsiderately cited in support of the eternal divinity of Christ. Nor were parties wanting who charged it against Arminius as a crime, that he had handed to his disciples, for their private transcription, certain treatises written in his own hand, and embracing his opinion on various controversies — forgetting that the famous Junius and others had used the same liberty before him [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. praefat. Act. Synod. Dordr.</span>]. Moreover, while the interests of the churches, notwithstanding that a controversy had arisen in the Academy on the subject of predestination, would in all probability have sustained no injury had the discussion been confined within the walls of the university, or to private conferences between professors and pastors, conducted with that good faith, moderation, and prudence that were meet; yet the churches came to be involved in far greater peril after many had filled the whole country and adjacent regions with false reports. Hence, for example, the public complaints and bitter declamations against Arminius with which the places of worship up and down at this time resounded, to the effect that entirely new doctrines were introduced; that the doctrine hitherto received by the Reformed was changed; that old heresies were now suspended on a new post; and that right good care ought to be taken that no injury should thence accrue to the Church.<br /><br />Among the rest, Festus Hommius, a clergyman of Leyden, was very active at that time as a declaimer of the sort described. This person, by underhand circumlocution, traduced the character of Arminius; blackened without end his words and actions; and hurled against him, in his absence, many charges, which in his presence he refused to produce. For this reason, the subject of our memoir, aware of what things were done against him in secret, thought that this ecclesiastic ought to be seriously and boldly reminded of his duty; and embracing an opportunity that occurred, John Uitenbogaert and Adrian Borrius, the one a clergyman of the Hague, the other of Leyden, being present, he replied to all the matters of calumny, and all his detractions, in such a manner that Hommius was struck dumb, and even declared, at the close of the interview, his <span style="font-style: italic;">willingness to institute an inquiry after truth</span>. But from this very time, strange to say, that clergyman not only shunned private interviews with Arminius, but, that he might not betray any want of confidence in his own cause, he subsequently told his familiar friends in private, that on returning home from this interview with Arminius, and humbly praying to God that He would vouchsafe to open his eyes and show him the truth, he was instantly surrounded with such a flood of light and joy, that he firmly resolved within himself <span style="font-style: italic;">to persevere henceforth in the received opinion</span>. On hearing this story, Arminius broke out into these words: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Well done, worthy investigators of the truth! As if God, forsooth, grants his Holy Spirit at one prayer in such large bestowals as to impart the ability to judge, in matters so great, without any liability of error! He gives his Holy Spirit to his elect who importune his awful majesty for it night and day.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Arm. ad Uitenb. epist. 20. Maji 1605. script.—Epist. Eccles. p. 245.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-16289016916699344332008-12-27T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-27T00:00:03.497-08:00Chapter 7 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 7, Part 3 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Meanwhile his colleagues up to this time had stirred no strife against him, on the subject of the controversies thus agitated; nor had they given as much as the slightest indication, public or private, of a hostile spirit [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm. 3 Kal. Sept. 1604.</span>]. For although Gomarus, who was engaged at this time in the Exposition of the Ninth Chapter of the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, had given a public pledge that he would discuss all the opinions concerning predestination, to be followed by a statement and proof of his own, this, so far from striking terror into Arminius, led him rather to declare, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that if that very distinguished man should advance such arguments as were incapable of being answered, he for his part would be the first to assent to his opinion and recant his own.</span>' Thus maintaining entire for his colleagues the same liberty of defending their own opinion in which he himself rejoiced, he cherished the hope that they would by no means overstep the bounds of Christian charity and fraternal equity.<br /><br />But alas, while thus secure, and meditating no evil, he was overtaken by a very vehement storm. For Gomarus did not think fit to wait till a proper opportunity should be furnished him for disputing on the subject of predestination, but either of his own accord, or, as is more probable, at the instigation of others, so far overstepped order, and his own proper turn, as to expose to public view certain theses on that selfsame subject, which, according to the sole custom of the Academy, and in his proper rotation, Arminius had already discussed; and reports spread throughout the city that he was about to descend into the arena against Arminius, in open war. The day intimated for holding this disputation, was the 31st October. When it came round, straightway Gomarus, in a preface sufficiently acrimonious, and with an excited countenance, stated the reasons which had impelled him, to hold this disputation out of the due order; and he advanced many things which were manifestly intended as an attack upon Arminius. As to the positions he defended, they hinged on this, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the object of predestination is creatures rational, salvable, damnable, creatable, fallible, and recoverable. Further, that from among these, indefinitely foreknown, God, as absolute sovereign, of his own right and good pleasure, foreordained, on the one hand, certain individuals, to his own supernatural ends, namely, eternal life, and creation in an entire state of original righteousness, and holiness of life; and also on the other hand destined other individuals, eternally rejected from eternal life, to death and everlasting ignominy, and to the ways leading thereto, namely, to creation in a state of integrity, permission to fall into sin, loss of original righteousness, and abandonment in that loss; for this end, that by this way of acting, he might make known his most sovereign authority, wrath, and power on the reprobate, and the glory of his saving grace in relation to the elect.</span>' Yea, more; on that same occasion this doctor asserted and openly maintained, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the gospel could not be simply called the manifestation of the divine predestination;</span>' and added, by way of corollary, that, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Castellio, Coornhert, and the Lutherans, falsely object to the Reformed Churches, and in particular to Calvin and Beza, who did signal service to the Church, and to the truth of predestination, in opposition to the Pelagians, that God by this doctrine is made the author of sin.</span>'<br /><br />Arminius, who was present at this disputation from beginning to end, stomached the insult, and bore in silence whatever odium was thus created against him. Nay, sick in body at the time, though not in mind, he, on the day following that on which the disputation was held (Nov. 1), opened his mind to Uitenbogaert in the following words :— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I know, and have the testimony of conscience, that I have neither said nor done aught to afford Gomarus just cause of offence. I will readily return to favour even with him, though his conduct has been most offensive — yea, and with him of Amsterdam also, if he will henceforth but hold his peace. It is not lawful for me to hate any one, or long to retain wrath against any one, however just: that God who is described to us in the Bible instructs me to this effect by his word, Spirit, and example. Would that he might teach me to be moved by nothing, except when any blame is justly attributable to myself. It is not my part to answer for what another says or does; and I should be foolish were I to concede to any one so much of right in me, as that he should be able to disturb me as often as he had a mind. Be this my brazen wall — a conscience void of offence. 'Forward still let me go in my begun search after truth, and therein let me die, with the good God on my side, even if, on this account, I must needs incur the hatred and ill-will of the whole world! The disciple is not above his master. No new thing is this, for the truth to be rejected even by those whom such conduct least beseems, and who least of all wish to incur such a charge.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm. 1 Nov., 1604, script</span>].<br /><br />Moreover, that he might not appear to have abandoned the defence of the truth, at which, through him, a stab had been dealt, or to have any misgivings with respect to his own cause, he composed not long after, for the benefit of those who under him were devoutly prosecuting the study of theology, that highly-finished Examination of the Theses exposed to view by Gomarus for public discussion, which, many years after his decease, was (in 1645) given to the world, along with these same theses of Gomarus, by that very learned man, Stephen Curcellaeus. This golden little treatise is characterised by the same acuteness, strength of reasoning, and transparency of learned diction which distinguish his other writings; and he appears to have presented his eminent colleague with a copy of it. Mark, reader, this most generous preface to it, which is well entitled to a place in our narrative: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">In the highest degree useful, and above all things necessary, is that admonition of the Apostle which commands us to prove and devoutly to examine the dogmas propounded in the Church before we approve and receive them as truths. For seeing that, if we except apostles and prophets, the most eminent doctors of the Church are not placed beyond the liability of error, it does happen that they advance some things occasionally which are not taught by God in his Word, but which they either themselves have excogitated in their own human spirit, or received from others to whose authority they attribute more than is meet. Nay, this very thing may happen even at the time when they themselves think that they have thoroughly examined the dogmas they propound according to the standard of Scripture. Such being the case, do not take it ill, illustrious Gomarus, if I weigh according to Scripture, and candidly and temperately explain what I desiderate in those theses on predestination which you penned not so long ago, and publicly exhibited as matter for disputation. I testify solemnly, and in the presence of God, that I take upon me this task not from the desire of contention, but in the endeavour to investigate and find out the truth, to the end that the truth may more and more become known and everywhere obtain in the Church of Christ. That you also set before you this aim when you addressed yourself to that disputation, I am thoroughly assured. In mind and end, then, we agree, however in judgment we may chance to differ. Of this difference I take, as in duty bound, God speaking in the Scriptures to be the arbiter; and devoutly venerating his majesty and supplicating his favour, let me now address myself to my task.</span>'<br /><br />These statements being premised, and a basis laid for his treatise, he proceeds to build thereupon his considerations on the several propositions of Gomarus, and of the proofs of these noted down on the margin. Eminently masculine and judicious is his reply to the corollary of Gomarus in which he complains of some who preferred against the Reformed Church, and its principal doctors, the charge of blasphemy. Here Arminius wisely judges that it to ought be borne in mind, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that it is one thing avowedly to make God the author of sin, and another thing to teach somewhat in ignorance from which one could legitimately infer that God, by that doctrine, was made the author of sin. The former could not be fastened upon any of the doctors of the Reformed Church; and whatever Castellio, Coornhert, and others, had urged, perhaps somewhat too offensively, against them, was grounded solely on this consideration, that in their opinion that offensive conclusion was fairly and legitimately deducible from the doctrine of those divines. But in identifying the Reformed Churches with the learned Calvin and Beza, Gomarus had done more than he was warranted to do. What some eminent doctors professed could not perpetually be laid to the charge of the churches, unless it were clearly evident that the same doctrine had been approved by the churches, and embodied in their Confessions. Moreover, setting aside all considerations of persons, or sinister intention as respects objectors, the naked arguments they advanced were entitled to examination. Celebrity of name exempted no one from the liability to err; and the first teachers of the Reformed may be held entitled to the highest esteem and gratitude of the Church, although they may not perhaps have seen sufficiently through all those things by which it had been deformed. It was false to rank with Pelagians those who impugned the opinion which Gomarus maintained on the subject of predestination, it being as clear as noon-day, from the ancient ecclesiastical synods, that the Pelagian doctrines could be rejected even by those who nevertheless by no means assented to the opinion contained in the above theses of Gomarus. Augustine himself could solidly confute the errors of the Pelagians, and at the same time omit that doctrine which he taught on the subject of divine predestination. Nay, even that opinion which Gomarus and several others delivered on that subject differed very materially from the opinion of Augustine, and supposed many things which Augustine would by no means have granted. It is incumbent on us to avoid the breakers not of Pelegianism only, but also of Manichaeism, and of errors still more infamous. For his part, after attentively weighing the doctrine, not so much of the entire Reformed Church as of Gomarus and certain others, he felt thoroughly persuaded that it followed from it that God was the author of sin; at the same time he also testified and declared that he heartily detested all the tenets of the Pelagian doctrine as these had been condemned in the synods of Mileve, Orange, and Jerusalem; and if any one could prove that aught akin to these was deducible from the sentiments he had above set forth, he would that very instant change his opinion.</span>'<br /><br />Thus writes Arminius; nor would we judge it dutiful to forbear mentioning in this connexion, that Gomarus, at a subsequent period, pressed by certain arguments advanced by Arminius in the treatise just referred to, introduced several changes for the better into his later theses on the subject of the eternal decree and predestination of God. For besides that he abandoned that absurd opinion, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the decrees of God are nought other than God himself,</span>' and maintained the direct contrary with all his might, he was also glad to admit that there is in God what the schoolmen call a conditionate knowledge, by the aid of which he sought to rid his opinion of that enormous monstrosity which made God the author of the sin of the first man, and consequently of all the rest which proceed from it [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex praefat. S. Curcellaei in Examen Gomari Thes.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-18090131249883594112008-12-26T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-26T00:00:05.269-08:00Chapter 7 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 7, Part 2 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />Perceiving, however, but too plainly, while yet in the very threshold of the office on which he had entered, that the young intellects under his care were entangling themselves in the intricacies of many profitless questions, and, to the neglect of the standard of celestial truth, prosecuting a variety of thorny theorems and problems, he took counsel with his colleagues, and gave it as his opinion that this growing evil should be resisted, and the youth recalled to the earlier and more masculine method of study. With this view, he reckoned nothing more important than to foreclose, as far as he could, crabbed questions, and the cumbrous mass of scholastic assertions, and to inculcate on his disciples that divine wisdom which was drawn from the superlatively pure fountains of the Sacred Word, and was provided for the express purpose of guiding us to a life of virtue and happiness. From his first introduction into the Academy it was his endeavour to aim at this mark, and give a corresponding direction to his studies both public and private. But truly this laudable attempt was in no small degree thwarted, partly by the jealousy which some had conceived against him, and partly also by a certain inveterate prejudice as to his heterodoxy, with which many ministers of religion had long been imbued, and under the impulse of which they stirred up his colleagues against him.<br /><br />The first germs, indeed, of this budding jealousy betrayed themselves in the following year (1604); For when Arminius, who had undertaken the task of interpreting the Old Testament in particular, proceeded also now and then to give a public exposition of certain portions of the New Testament, Gomarus took this amiss, and began to allege that the right of expounding the New Testament belonged solely to him, as Primarius Professor of Sacred Theology — for this title had been conceded to him by the Senatus Academicus, a short time prior to the arrival of Arminius. Nay, more; happening to meet Arminius, he felt unable to contain himself, and in a burst of passion broke out in these words — '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">You have invaded my professorship.</span>' Arminius replied that he did not mean to detract anything whatever from the primacy of his colleague, and from the academic titles and privileges conferred upon him; and that he had not done him the slightest injury, having obtained license from the honourable curators to select themes of prelection at any time, not only from the Old Testament, but also from the New, provided he did not encroach on the particular subject in which Gomarus might be engaged.<br /><br />But this dispute, which arose out of a matter of no moment, and was easily allayed, was from henceforth succeeded by others which opened the way to dissensions of greater magnitude, and of more disastrous issue to the Reformed Church. For Arminius, under the conviction that it was his duty to do nothing against the dictate of an undefiled conscience, and the proper liberty of teaching, in matters of religion, conceded to himself as well as to other doctors of divinity, judged it to be in no respect unbecoming or unlawful for him — especially as he had not concealed from the honourable curators of the Academy that on the subject of divine predestination he differed from the doctors of the Genevan school — to give forth, in a temperate manner, a public declaration of his opinion on that point. Accordingly, after the professors of theology had entered into a mutual arrangement as to the order and succession in which the disputations were to be held, and the lot had fallen to Arminius to dispute on the subject of predestination, he drew up, on the 7th February, certain theses on that point, and exposed them for public discussion. Their purport was this: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that divine predestination is the decree of God's good pleasure in Christ, by which, with himself, from eternity, he resolved to justify and adopt believers, on whom he decreed to bestow faith, and to give eternal life to them, to the praise of his glorious grace; that reprobation, on the other hand, is the decree of wrath, or the severe will of God, by which, from eternity, he resolved to condemn to eternal death, unbelievers who, by their own fault, and by the just judgment of God, will not believe, as persons who are not in a state of union with Christ—and this for the declaration of his wrath and power.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Uitenb. Hist. Eccl.</span>]. But although this position of his did not perfectly correspond to those which Calvin and Beza had given forth on this subject, still he by no means looked upon it as a novelty, but as entirely coinciding with the opinion which George Sohnius, and other divines before him of the Reformed religion, had taught both by tongue and pen. Besides, that he might not, in defending these positions, incur the just offence of any one, he was particularly on his guard, in the course of this disputation, against saying anything in disparagement of the reputation of Calvin and Beza, sparing' their names, and manifesting severity towards no one of a different opinion. Not long after, (on the 29th May, and sometime in July,) with the same freedom of discussion, and in the same temperate tone, he further subjected to public examination, his theses <span style="font-style: italic;">On the Church</span>, and <span style="font-style: italic;">On the Sin of our First Parents</span>; and in the course of this last disputation, Gomarus and Trelcatius being present, he took occasion, by a series of very solid arguments, to confute the <span style="font-style: italic;">necessity</span>, and establish the <span style="font-style: italic;">contingency </span>of that sin. [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Epist Eccles. p. 134.</span>]. But although he was convinced that the opinion of his adversaries on this point involved numerous absurdities, and that everything that was wont to be adduced, in palliation of this dogma, of the absolute necessity of things, deserved to be discarded, he nevertheless, in this as well as in other controversies, conducted his own cause with much moderation, and, directing his address to his hearers, begged this only at their hands, that they would diligently sift whatever arguments he advanced; adding — what on all occasions, public and private, he was wont to declare — that he was ready to yield to those who taught what might be more in accordance with truth. Not a few, however, murmured against the disputation thus held, and took it amiss that among other things he had maintained, 'that there is no absolute necessity in things, besides God; yea, that not even does fire burn necessarily; but that every necessity which exists in things, or events, is nothing else than the relation of cause to effect.' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm. 17 Aug. 1604, script. Vid. Epist. Eccles. p. 138.</span>].<br /><br />On the same point, too, shortly after, a discussion was started and kept up at considerable length with him, by the very learned Helmichius, who happened at that time to have taken a journey to Leyden [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Videsis de hac materia Armin. disserentem in Epist. ad Uitenb. 17 Aug. et 3 Kal. Sept. script. 1604.</span>]. Helmichius asserted, that many things were, in different respects, both contingent and necessary. This Arminius denied of things absolutely necessary. Helmichius appealed to passages plainly testifying <span style="font-style: italic;">that the word of God stands; that the word of God cannot be broken; that Gods counsel is fulfilled, &c.</span>; and thence inferred that what God had decreed must come to pass necessarily. Arminius denied this consequence, on the ground that God's decree might rightly and correctly be said to stand, if that which he had decreed came to pass, although it should not come to pass necessarily. Helmichius acknowledged that the opinion which Arminius defended, did not subvert the foundations of the faith, neither could it be called heretical. Arminius on the other hand maintained, that so far was this opinion from deserving to be branded with so black a name, that nothing, he felt persuaded, would tend more to illustrate the glory of God, than if all Christians whatsoever were to maintain <span style="font-style: italic;">that there is nothing necessary besides God; and that he not only foreknows things contingent, but also that his decrees are accomplished through contingent events and free causes</span>. At length, however, after much had passed on both sides, and Arminius had offered to hold a conference with him respecting all the articles of the Christian religion, and the entire system of theological doctrine, Helmichius bade him a friendly farewell.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-71256351824425717922008-12-25T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-28T22:48:00.667-08:00Chapter 7 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 7, Part 1 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER VII.<br /><br />DISCUSSIONS OF ARMINIUS AT LEYDEN, ESPECIALLY OH THE SUBJECT OF PREDESTINATION; AND CONSEQUENT OPPOSITION OF GOMARUS. —A.D. 1603, 1604.<br /><br />Thus honourably sent away, Arminius transferred his residence to Leyden, and concentrated all his care on the one aim, how to sustain with sufficient dignity the office he had obtained. As he reflected in those days, upon the lustre of that very important office, his heart sometimes failed him. In course of time, however, reassured by the kindly judgments of many respecting him, and by the favour of the entire Academy, he (in a letter dated 22nd Sept. 1603) gave expression in these words to the confidence of his spirit: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I will therefore, with the help of the good God, address myself to this province, and look for success by his abundant blessing. He knows from what motive I have undertaken this office, what is my aim, what object I have in view in discharging the duties of it. He discerns and approves, I know. It is not the empty honour of this world — mere smoke and bubble — nor the desire of amassing wealth, (which indeed were in vain, let me strive to the utmost,) that has impelled me hither; but my one wish is to do public service in the gospel of Christ, and to exhibit that gospel as powerfully and plainly as possible before those who are destined, in their turn, to propagate it to others.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Epist. Arm. 22 Sept. 1603. script.</span>].<br /><br />In this spirit he mounted the academic chair, and commenced his prelections with three elegant and polished orations, which he delivered in succession. The first treated <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Of the object of Sacred Theology</span>; the second, <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Of the Author and End of Theology</span>; the third of its <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Certitude</span>. By this method he strove to instil into the minds of the students a love for that divine and most dignified of all the sciences; and at his very entrance into his office he judged with Socrates, the wisest of the Gentiles, that the principal part of his responsibility stood fulfilled could he only succeed in inflaming his disciples with an ardent desire of learning. The foundation being thus laid, he proceeded to build thereupon his finished prelections on the prophetic book of Jonah, which, many years before, he had expounded from the pulpit in his vernacular tongue. And indeed these lectures, while scarcely yet begun, conciliated towards him the favourable regards of auditors of all ranks, to such a degree that they regarded with profound respect this new Atlas of the Academy; and judged that in this renowned doctor and successor, most of all, they had got the deceased Junius restored to them again. The most noble curators of the Academy, too, congratulating themselves and their school on the accession of such a man, rendered the return of a grateful mind to those by whose interest and assiduity they had procured his release from the people of Amsterdam. As the illustrious Nicolas Cromhout, senator of the Provincial Court, had been preeminently active in this business, the noble John Dousa thought him entitled to have the following tribute of thanks sent to him in name of the entire Academy:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Cromhout! in Holland's Senate no mean name;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Cromhout, rare laurel in thy country's fame;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Practised in courts, accomplished and refined.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">No sordid motive taints thy lofty mind.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Much owes our era to thy virtues rare,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">(Could heaven a boon bestow more rich and fair?)</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Yet more we owe; far through thy zeal it came</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">That Amsterdam gave up a tender claim,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">And Leyden's learned halls could boast Arminius' name.</span>'<br /><br />[<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">The following are the lines, the sense of which we have thus endeavoured to present to the English reader:— </span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">'Kromhouti, o Batavi pars haud postrema Senatus,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Cromhouti, o Patriae gloria rara tuse:</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Quod Fori, et assiduo Rerum limatus in usu,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Sordida nou ulla peetora labe geras;</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Multum equidem (quid enim majus dare Numina possint?)</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Virtuti debent saecula nostra tuae:</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Plus tamen, Arminium quod te duce et auspice primum</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Hollands urbs dederit Amsterodama Scholae.'</span>]<br /><br />To these lines we have pleasure in adding part of a most elegant poem published on the same occasion, and by the same poet, in praise of the very eloquent Uitenbogaert:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">By every true and pious breast,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">By all who love religion's ways,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">This truly ought to be confessed —</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">That Uitenbogaert claims our praise.</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">To him our lasting thanks are due:</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Nor least that Leyden's learned fame</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">Gained through his zeal a lustre new —</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);">It gained Armmius' rising name.</span>'<br /><br />[<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">The following are the original lines;—</span><br /><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">'Et sane fateamur hoc uecesse est</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Omnes queis pietas, amorque veri</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Aut res Religionis ulla cordi est,</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Istoc nomine nos Uitenbogardo</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Esse ac perpetuum fore obligatos:</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Haud paulo tamen obligatiores</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Recens ob meritum, quod Aurasinae</span><br /><span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Doctorem Arminium Scholae dedisti.'</span>]<br /><br />Nor ought it by any means to be passed by in silence, that this same clergyman, in consideration of his strenuous efforts to further the call of Arminius, was honoured with a silver cup; this memorial of gratitude being presented to him, in name of the Senatus Academicus, by those influential men, Cornelius Neostadius, and Nicolas Zeistius [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Diario MS. Uitenb.</span>].<br /><br />Meanwhile the subject of our memoir had scarcely get foot in the Academy when he was requested by two students of theology, namely Corranus and Gilbert Jacchaeus, that he would consent to honour with his presence their theses, or positions, which they had drawn up to be subjected to public examination — those of Corranus being on <span style="font-style: italic;">Justification</span>, those of Jacchaeus on <span style="font-style: italic;">Original Sin</span> [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex tractatu quodam Bertii, Belg. idiom, script.</span>]. But although these positions contained some things not exactly to his mind, or in harmony with the opinion he had formed on these questions, he judged it nevertheless to be quite in keeping with his office to undertake the part proposed to him; for he was not ignorant of the fact, that some students of divinity under the presidency of Gomarus himself, and of other doctors, had more than once, in their own cause, defended certain dogmas to which these same doctors did not on all points accord their assent. For this reason the subject of our memoir also (on the 28th October) conformed to this custom, by no means unusual in universities; but on this occasion these very learned youths defended so strenuously each his own cause, that there was scarcely any need for the help or interference of the president.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-72152733564578674952008-12-24T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-28T22:42:40.661-08:00Chapter 6 Part 3<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 6, Part 3 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />But lest they should come to too close quarters, Gomarus immediately proceeded to attack the opinion of Arminius on the seventh chapter of the epistle to the Romans, declaring and maintaining that it ran counter to the Palatine Catechism, and adducing certain passages from that document — yea, and pressing into his service even its marginal notes. Arminius, on the other hand, refuted the arguments of his opponent, and boldly vindicated, against his exceptions, his own interpretation; maintaining, moreover, that that expression of the Catechism which was urged against him, viz., '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">unless we are regenerated by the Holy Spirit [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Quaest Catecli. Palat.</span>],</span>' ought to be explained of regeneration in its initial stage. He further testified '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he utterly rejected and detested the tenets on this point propounded by the Pelagians, and approved of those which Augustine and other divines of the Primitive Church had maintained in opposition to Pelagius and his followers; that he entirely assented to the Catechism; that he by no means explained that passage from Paul, of the man considered as utterly irregenerate; that his own opinion on this point was at the furthest possible remove from that of Prosper Dysidaeus (Faustus Socinus); and that he had never furnished just cause for such great commotions as had formerly been excited in relation to this subject.</span>'<br /><br />On hearing this defence, and taking into account that Arminius disclaimed many of the tenets imputed to him, and thought far otherwise on that controversy than from the report of others he had been given to understand, Gomarus ingenuously declared '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that he had hitherto supposed that Arminius maintained the opinion of Prosper Dysidaeus, but he now perceived that on that question he was otherwise minded; and therefore, as he (Gomarus) had not apprehended with sufficient clearness the full mind of Arminius on the matter, he begged that he would not think it too much to divulge his own opinions on the subject a little more fully and accurately.</span>' At this request, however, that honourable man, and curator of the university, Neostadius, expressed his astonishment; insisting that those at whose request the distinguished Gomarus had undertaken his present task ought to have instructed him better respecting the opinion of Arminius; and that it belonged to him and to them, and not to Arminius, who sustained the character of the party accused, to produce those things which went to inculpate him. Arminius took the same ground, and added that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">he would not say a word till Gomarus himself, and the other deputies of the churches, should have cleared him of the calumnies with which he had been aspersed.</span>' The honourable curators having lent their sanction to this declaration, Gomarus at length intimated '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that, since Arminius repudiated Pelagianism, he was satisfied; and that his interpretation (of Romans vii.), such as it was, could be tolerated.</span>' The deputies of the churches made a declaration to the same effect; immediately after which, Arminius, producing a copy of the New Testament, which he always bore about with him, forthwith read the whole of that seventh chapter of Romans, from the beginning to the end, and expounded it so felicitously, that no one, not even Gomarus himself, hazarded a word in opposition — with the exception of Arnold Cornelis, who started one objection, on the solution of which he became instantly mute. On hearing this, Neostadius, turning to the deputies of the churches, exclaimed, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Is this, then, that controversy, so often agitated, which has for many years past stirred such mighty contention and clamour? And so we have in a brief space of time allayed a strife to terminate which even many years have not sufficed the people of Amsterdam!</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex tractatu quodam Bertii, Belgice conscript.</span>].<br /><br />That primary question being accordingly dismissed, they proceeded to treat, though only in a cursory way, of the Church of Rome; also of the determination of the human will by the Divine decree; and other kindred articles respecting which certain persons had insinuated that the sentiments of Arminius differed in some degree from those of the Reformed. But to the several charges Arminius learnedly and solidly replied; and so happily explained and defended his own opinion on these and other points, that the distinguished Gomarus and the other deputies of the churches did not deem it worth their while to contend further about them [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Diario MS. Uitenb.</span>]. And more, to rid their minds utterly of all their doubts, he, in the same confidence of spirit with which he had entered on this conference, drew from his pocket, and presented to the inspection of each, his own '<span style="color: rgb(153, 51, 0); font-style: italic;">Dissertation on the, proper sense of the Seventh Chapter of the Romans,</span>' which some time previously he had most learnedly written out in an expanded form. As no one, however, lifted this manuscript from the table, or said anything whatever in reply to his interrogation, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">If the brethren had aught further to require of him?</span>' the conference terminated, with so happy an issue, that all, without exception, gave him the right hand of fraternal love; and conducted him, in a body, to an entertainment which, by order of the illustrious curators of the Academy, had been provided for them in the Castile Inn (as it was called), at the Hague. On this occasion, too, these curators testified '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">that the suspicions stirred against Arminius had not been substantiated, nor was there just cause why any one should judge unfavourably respecting him; for in the exercise of the liberty granted him of prophesying (of discussing sacred things) in the church, he had taught nothing that was inimical to the Christian religion.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Bertii Orat. Funeb.</span>].<br /><br />The obstacles that obstructed his path to the professorship having been thus happily removed, some, whose counsel and authority he highly valued, urged him to consent to his being invested with the title of Doctor, and with this view to submit to a fresh examination. He judged it dutiful to defer to their wish; and accordingly repaired to Leyden on the 19th of June, and on the same day underwent a private examination. The success and issue of this examination, which was conducted by the distinguished Gomarus, I prefer to express in the words of Arminius himself, as furnishing a thoroughly candid and remarkable testimony in favour of his examinator. He says, '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">I was examined on Tuesday by Gomarus, in the presence of the illustrious Grotius and Merula. He performed his part actively and honourably. I answered his questions as well as I could at the time. He, and the other two who were present, expressed themselves satisfied. The examination turned on questions relating to the substance of theology; and he conducted himself quite as he ought, and in the manner I could have wished.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Arm. Epist. ined. ad J. Uiteub. 21 Juuii script.</span>].<br /><br />Three weeks after, as a further step to his obtaining the title of doctor, he held a public disputation on the 10th day of July, forenoon and afternoon; and defended ably and spiritedly the theses assigned him <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Concerning the Nature of God</span> — the part of opponents having been undertaken by Peter Bertius, Festus Hommius, Crucius, and Nicolas Grevinchovius. The disputation passed off with universal applause. Our Arminius was the first, as Bertius testifies, who, in the Leyden Academy, bore away the title and degree of doctor. The celebrated Gomarus conferred the honour upon him, with the usual formalities, on the 11th July. At the sametime also, and on the occasion of this academic festival, he delivered that highly polished oration <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">Concerning the Priestly Office of Christ</span>, which is still extant among his posthumous works. Moreover, that a public memorial might remain of the honour thus conferred upon him, the Senatus Academicus further decreed that the following testimonial should be presented to him at the time:—<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0); font-style: italic;">The Rector and Professors of the Leyden Academy in Holland, to the reader, greeting:</span>'<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Praiseworthy in every respect, and founded on reasons the strongest and most commendable, is the custom introduced by emperors, kings, and commonwealths, that the man who has done distinguished service in any science or art should be presented with the honourable testimonial of some university, and become known to all by the proclamation of his learning and virtue. If this be of the highest utility in all the sciences and arts, the more needful is it in sacred theology, by how much the doctrine of piety, from the majesty of divine things, in the highest degree transcends all other arts and sciences. A twofold advantage, in particular, seems to result from such testimonials — to these who are furnished with them on the one hand, to the public on the other; for in the first place, true and genuine doctors of the Church come thereby to be better known; and in the next place, those engaged in this science—the noblest and most glorious of all — are animated and stimulated to prosecute with more alacrity such lofty studies. They too who are invested with a dignity so great are first reminded of their own duty, and of the faith they have pledged to Christ and his Church; and then they also feel animated themselves to hold on successfully in the career they have begun. Wherefore, as that most reverend and illustrious man, the learned James Arminius, has, during these many years past, in which he has applied his mind to the study of sacred literature, abundantly proved to the satisfaction of all of us, not only in a private examination, but also in theses <span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(153, 51, 0);">On the Nature of God</span> which he publicly and most learnedly maintained against the arguments and objections of all, his remarkable and extraordinary knowledge and skill, at once of sacred letters and of orthodox theology, we have judged him in the highest degree worthy to be honoured with our public testimonial, and to be by us commended to all good men. Accordingly, by the authority granted us by that most excellent prince and lord, of glorious memory, William of Nassau, Prince of Orange, and Governor of Holland, Zealand, &c., and also by the illustrious States of Holland and Zealand, we have designated and declared, and do designate and declare, the forenamed learned James Arminius (and happy and auspicious may this be to the Republic and to the Christian Church!) to be Doctor of Sacred Theology; and we have given, and do give unto him, authority to interpret publicly and privately the sacred Scriptures, to teach the mysteries of religion, and to dispute, write, and preside at discussions on points of the Christian Faith, as well as to solve theological questions; also to perform all public and formal acts pertaining to the true office of a Doctor in theology; in fine, to enjoy all the privileges and immunities as well as prerogatives which, whether by right or by custom, are due to this order and dignity of the theological doctorate. In fullest faith of all which, we have ordered to be given to him this public testimonial, authenticated by having affixed to it the greater seal of this Academy, and subscribed by the hand of the secretary. — Given at Leyden, in Holland, in the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred and three, on the tenth day of July, new style.</span>'<br /><br />'<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">B. Vulcanius.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex ipso autograph, sigillo Academiae subsignato.</span>].<br /><br />Having in this manner obtained the title of doctor, the subject of our memoir returned to Amsterdam; and after transacting in that city some matters of business which considerations of honour made it requisite to dispatch, at the close of the summer holidays he bade a final farewell to that celebrated church, of which he had officiated as pastor for a period of fifteen years. Nay, more; that he might address himself with the more spirit to the province assigned him, and sustain no injury henceforth from the sinister reports which had previously been circulated to his prejudice, it seemed good to the Amsterdam Presbytery, on the eve of his departure, to furnish him with an honourable testimonial, in which the rulers of that church testified:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">That the consummate integrity of Arminius, their dearest co-presbyter, both for blamelessness of life and soundness of doctrine as well as of manners, had, in the course of long acquaintance been so thoroughly testified, that they would value nothing more highly than the continued privilege of his advice, services, and familiar friendship. But, seeing it was now otherwise arranged, they gave thanks to Almighty God that they had reaped fruit, not to he repented of, from the unwearied zeal and exertions of this their fellow-labourer. They also acknowledged, freely and cordially, that they were not a little indebted to this their beloved brother, for the alacrity with which he had borne his full share along with them in all that pertained to the efficient discharge of the sacred function; and for this reason they commended him, from the heart, to all pious men, and to all the most learned.</span>'<br /><br />This very handsome testimony was followed up by another from the Amsterdam Classis, signed in name of the entire judicatory, by the Revds. John Ursinus, Halsberg, and Hallius, in which they openly declare: '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">That Doctor Arminius, who had now for fifteen years been a member of their assembly, had always purely, and with much success, taught wholesome doctrine; had administered the sacraments, according to the institution of our Lord; had propagated with great zeal the true and Christian religion; and had, by his diligence and regular attendance, proved an ornament to their assembly; further, that by his prudence and address he had settled with others affairs of great difficulty and importance; that he always promptly undertook whatever burdens were imposed upon him with a view to promote the edification of the church; that he had, up to that very day, adorned his sacred calling by the respectability and probity of his life; arid, in a word, that both in the sacred office, and in the common intercourse of life, he had conducted himself towards all in such a manner as became the genuine servant of Christ.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Integra haec testimonia vide sis in Bert. Orat. Funeb.</span>].Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-34913825137170455432008-12-23T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-28T22:38:28.406-08:00Chapter 6 Part 2<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 6, Part 2 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />On all these circumstances connected with the call of Arminius to the professorship we have judged it proper to enter more minutely into detail, both because of the great light thrown on our path by the manuscript journals of Uitenbogaert, who besides being present as an eye and ear witness, was himself a prime actor in the business; and also because some writers of the present age, in recounting this matter, have, partly in gross ignorance of the things transacted, and partly in bad faith, advanced much on the subject that transcends very far indeed the boundaries of truth. On this account particularly, James Triglandius, as compared with others, is in the highest degree blameworthy, and deserves to have branded on him a special mark of condemnation [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. Trigland. Hist. Ecclesiast. pag. 287.</span>]. If his testimony be entitled to credit respecting the canvassing which Arminius is alleged to have systematically, and with downright servility, prosecuted among his colleagues in order to obtain his dismission, and indeed respecting the entire course of his life, to which he makes reference in the same place, then certainly Arminius has done many things which must be pronounced utterly unworthy of an honourable and dignified teacher of the Church. But, in truth, how sorrily the author named fulfils the duties, in this case, of an ingenuous historian, may be inferred from the fact, that the most of those things which tend in the highest degree to stir bad feeling against Arminius, and which, in giving an account of his call to the professorship, he pretends to have himself taken from the very acts of the Amsterdam presbytery, are in fact by no means to be found in those acts which this ecclesiastical court drew up in the course of that year; unless, perchance, we must regard as authentic acts a certain rough and garbled account of the transactions which, after a long interval of time (about the year 1617) [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vid. G. Brantii Parentis mei F. M. Apolog. pro Hist. Reform. contra J. Rulaeum Belgice conscript.</span>], and amid the most fervent heat of the controversies respecting predestination, was drawn up in favour of that very bitter antagonist of the Remonstrants, Adrian Smout, for the most part by P. Plancius — the indefatigable calumniator of Arminius even after his death — who took care to get it inserted among the acts of the Amsterdam Presbytery. That Triglandius really trod in the footsteps of this slanderer, and drew those things which concern the life and call of Arminius from this document of Plancius, was disclosed by John Eulasus, a respectable minister at Amsterdam not so long ago, who, pressed by the native force of truth, was constrained to confess the fact in the same little work [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Lib. J. Rulaei cui titulus <span style="font-style: italic;">G. Brantii audax simulatio</span> Belg. idiom. script.</span>] in which he sets himself, with sufficient acerbity, to assail Arminius, and my father of happy memory, the defender of Arminius.<br /><br />Of little avail, in like manner, to the prejudice of Arminius, are the testimonies cited by this same Triglandius, and appended to the narration drawn up by Plancius, of the following ministers, Hallius, Ursinus, and Lemaire, respecting the protestations of Arminius, and the pledge that he gave them, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">he would advance nothing whatever in the Leyden Academy prejudicial to the peace of the Church; nay, that he would keep to himself his private opinions, and such as were repugnant to the consent of the Reformed Churches, until the meeting of the next National Synod.</span>' For, besides that little weight is to be attached to these private declarations— which, moreover, were drawn up in behalf of the zealot whom we have named above (Smout), and that seven years and more after Arminius's death — Arminius constantly declared what is ascribed to him in these testimonies, and reserved a full explanation of his opinion on the subject of predestination to a general council of the churches; until at length, in consequence of the growing strifes 'stirred by many in relation to this question, he, by order of his superiors, and in the very assembly of the States, disclosed all the sentiments and all the scruples of his mind. Whether and how far by this deed he is to be held guilty of violated faith, and rightly and justly to be regarded as the leader and instigator in rending the peace of the Church, the following line of narrative will yet more clearly show.<br /><br />The following words which he wrote to Uitenbogaert, shortly after he obtained his dismission, clearly indicate with what modesty of mind, and aversion from every appearance of canvassing, the subject of our memoir bore himself in this delicate conjuncture:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">My beloved friend, there is one thing which vehemently distresses me. How shall I be able to satisfy such a great expectation? How shall I be able to prove myself to be in some measure worthy of having so mighty a movement set agoing on my account? But I console myself with this consideration alone, that I have not courted the professorship, and that the curators were warned of those things which have happened before they had determined anything on the subject of my call.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Arm. Epist. ad Uitenb. 26 Ap. 1603.</span>].<br /><br />Meanwhile, Arminius by no means dreaded the appointed conference with Gomarus, but awaited its issue with a perfectly tranquil mind. Nay, when his familiar friends had various consultations among themselves as to the plan of the conference about to be held, and some were desirous of having it arranged through the honourable curators that this conference should be held privately with Gomarus rather than in the presence of the deputies of the churches, so far was he from any inclination to lend an ear to this advice, and elude the condition stipulated by the brethren in Amsterdam, that he gave vent to his feelings in the following words:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">And to what suspicions shall I then be exposed! For I shall be regarded as not merely suspected of heresy, but also, and thus far distrustful of my own cause, that I dare not to enter on the conference in the presence of the deputies of the Synod. I would rather confer with the entire Synod, and with the two Synods (of North and South Holland) than give occasion, even the least, for judging otherwise of me than that, cultivating a good conscience in all things, I do not dread the most prolix conference, yea not even the most rigid examination.</span>'<br /><br />The sixth day of May was accordingly announced for this conference to be held, in terms of the stipulated condition; and it took place at the Hague, in the house of the noble Lord of Norderwick, in the presence not only of Arnold Cornells, and Werner Helmichius, in name of the churches of North and South Holland, but also of these most influential and learned men, Nicolas Cromhout, Rumboldt Hogerbeets, and J. Uitenbogaert, whom the honourable curators of the Academy had earnestly invited to grace the occasion. First of all Gomarus marvelled, and took it amiss, that he saw no delegate present from the Church in Amsterdam, notwithstanding that the noble curators, in a most courteous letter delivered to the ecclesiastical court of that city, had besought that some one in their name should be present at the conference now to be held. For this divine thought it not quite proper that those should be absent on whose account principally he himself had come hither: affirming, moreover, that he was '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">but little acquainted with the discourses and opinions of Arminius; that the greater part of the doubts respecting him had been stirred by the brethren in Amsterdam; and that it was their part, in consequence, to instruct and advise him in reference to the mode and 'subject matter of this conference.</span>' At length, after a few preliminary explanations by the honourable curators, of the leading object of the meeting, the learned divine declared, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">although he would rather that this province had not been committed to him, he yet reckoned it a debt which he owed to the cause of truth to undertake its defence, agreeably to the request of brethren, as far as circumstances might demand.</span>'<br /><br />Arminius, on the other hand, exprassed the utmost delight that he saw presented to him this most excellent and long-wished for opportunity of vindicating the innocence of his good name. An agreement was forthwith made as to the order and heads of the subjects to be considered; when Arminius, first of all, judged it right that the principle ought to be borne in mind, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">not every difference concerning religion respected the essentials of faith, and that those who dissented in certain points which did not affect fundamentals, were entitled to forbearance.</span>' In corroboration of this claim he instantly cited a certain celebrated saying of St Augustine; and was proceeding to adduce more opinions to the same effect, from ancient as well as recent divines, when Gomarus objected, declaring it to be superfluous, and that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">the one point to be settled was, whether those questions of which they were about to treat ought, or ought not, to be regarded as essentials.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Diario M.S. Uitenb.</span>]. He maintained the affirmative; Arminius maintained the negative, and proceeded forthwith to establish the truth of his position.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1460927184673531601.post-88513688455670757082008-12-22T00:00:00.000-08:002008-12-22T00:00:02.621-08:00Chapter 6 Part 1<span style="font-style: italic;">The Life of James Arminius<br />Chapter 6, Part 1 of 3.</span><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">This biography of James Arminius was written in Latin by Caspar Brandt, published by Gerard Brandt in 1724, and translated to English by John Guthrie in 1854.</span><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">--------------------</span><br /><br />CHAPTER VI.<br /><br />FURTHER PROSECUTION AND SUCCESSFUL ISSUE OF ARMINIUS' CALL TO THE PROFESSORSHIP. A.D. 1603.<br /><br />Arminius meanwhile, not unaware of those things which were in agitation against him, strove to bend all his plans to this one aim, that of finding out a way in which he might defend himself against the criminations of his adversaries, and disarm them of their power. In particular, feeling keenly that he had been covered with stigmas in the hearing of Barneveldt, it appeared to him in the highest degree desirable that he should maintain the stainlessness of his reputation in the presence of that most exalted man; and that before presenting himself at the Hague he should intimate his purpose to the honourable magistrates, and in addition to them, to Helmichius himself, and others who had branded so black a stigma on his name.<br /><br />He was prevented, however, from carrying into effect this purpose and journey by the adverse state of his health, having been seized with a catarrh contracted by cold, which violently affected his brain and adjacent parts. He informed Uitenbogaert of his circumstances, and, moreover, disclosed to him the state of his mind and his wish, in the following words [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Epist. Eccles. Ep. 58, pag. 109, 110.</span>]:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Would that this might be obtained from the most noble Barneveldt, namely, that they should receive orders to proceed against me before him, I being present. This verily I aim at and desire far more ardently than that which they think I desire — I mean the theological professorship. But I thoroughly persuade myself (and thus, surely, it ought to turn out) that those good men will not obtain credit with considerate persons, especially as he who is aimed at stands forth for his lawful defence, and is an elder against whom no one has a right to take up an accusation except under two or three witnesses. My opinion, therefore, is, that that journey is not so urgently necessary at this time in consequence of the departure already of a large proportion of the deputies, to whom Helmichius might appeal were I to institute proceedings with him. Meanwhile there remains with me the full right of originating an action at law against hun, and also against the rest who are associated with him. In regard to this, I shall consider, from your advice and that of others, what to do. If, however, you deem it needful that I should open my mind to you in reply to a few queries, you may transmit them in writing, and I will answer you with the utmost plainness and sincerity; for I am unwilling either to commit or to omit anything that might tend either to promote or to impede my call; inasmuch as I have resolved to commit myself wholly to the will of God, that I may be able to maintain a good conscience whatever may be the issue of the affair. In the meantime, I would have you to be of good cheer, and moderate your grief, for well I know how needful is this request. The Lord God will provide and grant that success which he knows will be most conducive to his own glory and the edification of the Church — yea more, and to the salvation of me and mine. On Him I cast all my care: He will bring forth my righteousness as the light, and my judgment as the noon-day.</span>'<br /><br />During all this time, the honourable curators of the Academy, promising themselves better things of Arminius than rumour held out, had resolved to leave nothing untried by which they might gain Arminius and their wish. Nay, communicating their counsels to the illustrious Prince Maurice, they strenuously besought him to associate with them some one to act in his name, for the furtherance of this business with the people of Amsterdam. To this petition, the Prince gave his gracious assent; and forthwith summoning Uitenbogaert into his presence (on the 13th March), he entreated him, in kindly terms that he would not scruple to undertake this province, as being in great measure an ecclesiastical one — and pledged his faith to furnish him with credentials. Armed with these, he at length, along with the honourable J. Dousa, and N. Zeistius, Syndic of Leyden, set out for Amsterdam on the first day of April; being followed, a little after, by the honourable Neostadius and Nicolas Cromhout, the chief senator of the supreme court: this last the curators had called to their assistance, his influence being very powerful with the Senate of Amsterdam. To smooth for themselves an easier path to the attainment of their end, they judged it expedient to hold interviews, in the first instance, with several of the magistrates, and ministers of the Church. Having on the 5th April, accordingly, obtained public audience of the honourable magistrates, they explained, at length, their reasons for the journey they had undertaken, — Cromhout maintaining the cause of the curators, and Uitenbogaert prosecuting the orders of the Prince [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Diario MS. Uitenb.</span>]. They pressed their petition to obtain Arminius, on a variety of grounds; the rulers, on the other hand, set forth the merits of their pastor, and his useful and necessary services in refuting the opinions of different parties on points connected with religion; and declared that they could not dispense with the ministry of so great a man. These, and other arguments of the kind, the curators bent in their own favour, and vigorously retorted; at length the rulers replied that they would deliberate further on the matter, and gave permission, besides, to treat with the ecclesiastical court respecting it.<br /><br />At a meeting, accordingly, convened on the 8th April, the delegates of the Academy submitted to the presbytery the same reasons for their proposal which they had advanced in presence of the magistrates; in addition to which, the better to promote their object, they held out the hope, and gave the pledge that should the leading men of the church of Amsterdam resolve to substitute in the place of Arminius, after his dismission, another eminent pastor, yea, and even to renew their call to Baselius, the very eloquent minister of the church at Bergen-op-Zoom, from whom they had previously met with a repulse, the illustrious States and the Prince himself, would exert themselves to the utmost for the realisation of their wish. The presbytery shortly after, having previously spent some time in deliberation, came to the decision (on the llth April) to intimate, through certain delegates to the honourable magistrates, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">Arminius more than others was bound to his own church, and that they would decidedly prefer that he should be retained.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Actis Synod. Eccles. Amstel.—Vid. Trigland. Hist. p. 286.</span>].<br /><br />This decision of the ecclesiastical court being, in the opinion of the rulers, expressed in somewhat dubious and too general terms, they demanded of them a more extended counsel and resolution in respect to the business in question [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Diario MS. Uitenb.</span>], on which the presbytery decreed to treat, through the same delegates, with Arminius himself. These delegates, accordingly, setting on him with expressions of caressing blandishment, ardently besought him that he would suffer himself to be induced to devote his services and fulfil his pledge henceforward to this church. Arminius replied, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">formerly, indeed, he had been less inclined to undertake this professorial office; but now, as matters stood, he felt himself rather impelled to undertake it, and ask his dismission. He had his own reasons for thinking that were his dismission refused, it would no longer be in his power to subserve the interests of the Church in Amsterdam. But if, perchance, the expense originally laid out in enabling him to prosecute his studies should be alleged as an objection to his obtaining a dismission, he would rather make restitution to them than that this call should be set aside. He was moreover prepared, in presence of the delegates of the Synod and of the Church, to hold a conference with the eminent Gomarus.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Actis Presb. Amstelod. citatis a Trigland. p. 286.</span>].<br /><br />On learning this, the magistrates expressed no small solicitude and fear in reference to this business, lest Arminius should happen to suffer in his health from taking the refusal of his dismission too deeply to heart, and thus become useless alike to the Church and to the Academy, and many groundless rumours be thereby created; on which grounds they urgently demanded of the ecclesiastical court a further deliberation on the matter. But the presbytery here began to weave occasions of delay, and to differ somewhat among themselves—some charging Arminius with bad doctrine, while others defended him. Wherefore, having again requested an audience, on the 13th day of April, at the close of the evening service, the above-named delegates of the Academy presented themselves before this ecclesiastical assembly. They tried in every variety of way to impel the presbytery to dismiss Arminius, and to urge them to give a full deliverance. They further declared, through Uitenbogaert, who acted as their mouth, that '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">as they perceived that the tergiversation of this meeting was grounded on the wrong suspicions of some respecting Arminius, they would abandon this call on the spot if the ecclesiastical court would, in express terms, accuse him of bad doctrine. The care of the Academy had been committed to them, and its welfare lay much too near their heart to allow them to consent to have any connexion with a divine of unsound views. But if, nevertheless, any doubt should yet cling to the minds of some, they pledged their faith that Arminius should not be installed into this academic function before he had given full satisfaction to his future colleague, the distinguished Gomarus.</span>' [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Vita Uitenb. Belgice ab ipso conseripta, cap. vi.</span>].<br /><br />After hearing this, and holding some further consultation on the matter, the presbytery at last gave their consent to the dismission requested [<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);">Ex Actis Presbyt Amstelod.—Vid. Trigland. Hist. Eccles.</span>], the following stipulation being made:— '<span style="color: rgb(102, 51, 0);">First, Arminius shall not leave Amsterdam to enter on this new function until the church of this city be provided with another pastor, learned and pious, and if practicable, Baselius; secondly, after holding a conference with Gomarus on certain points of Christian doctrine, before the delegates of the churches, he shall wipe away all suspicion of heterodoxy by a candid explanation of his own opinion; and also, thirdly, should he happen at any time spontaneously to make up his mind to resign the office of professor, or should necessity urgently demand his services for the church in Amsterdam, he shall be at liberty to resume the pastoral function.</span>' This ecclesiastical decision was laid before the honourable magistrates on the following day (the 15th April), who, after first convening and taking into their counsel the illustrious senate of the city, also gave their assent. Informed immediately of this result, the curators of the Academy expressed their thanks; and having obtained, a little after, the consent of Arminius himself, they set out on their journey homeward with great delight.Arminihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01024404338528764429noreply@blogger.com0